the yortan culture within the early bronze age by turhan kiamil volume i
TRANSCRIPT
THE YORTAN CULTURE WITHIN THE EARLY BRONZE AGE
OF WESTERN ANATOLIA
by
Turhan Kiamil
VOLUME I
Submitted to the Faculty of Arts in fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Institute of Archaeo-
logyj University of London, 1980.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME I
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1 BURIALS OF YORTAN CEMETERY
CHAPTER 2 FINDS FROM YORTAN. CEMETERY
a) Pottery
b) Idols and Figurines
c) Spindle Whorls
d) Metal Objects
Page
1
5
21
21
34
37
39
CHAPTER 3A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE YORTAN POTTERY 41
Class A Pottery 42
Class B Pottery . 88
Class C Pottery 91
Summary 96
CHAPTER 4 CHRONOLOGY 103
CHAPTER 5 THE YORTAN CULTURE OF WESTERN ANATOLIA 119
CATALOGUE OF THE FINDS
ABBREVIATIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
134
198
200
ABSTRACT
Yortan is a prehistoric burial site in the valley of Bakir gay
(Kaikos) in western Turkey. It was found and excavated by a French
engineer, Paul Gaudin, some eighty years ago, but results have never
been properly published. The finds which constitute the material
offerings to the dead are now widely dispersed between some seven European museums. The research aims at bringing, for the first time,
this well known but improperly understood material of prehistoric Anatolia into one single body of finds, and in that sense it could be considered as the long overdue publication of the site. Two site
plans which belong to the archives of the British Museum, Western
Asiatic Department, are also brought to light for the first time and
make an important addition to the understanding of the burial customs
of Yortan and Bronze Age western Anatolia in general.
Large pithoi, up to 2m in height, were used as coffins, where
dead adults lay in a contracted position on, one side. Infants and
children were put in smaller jars. The tomb furniture consists
mostly of pottery in the form of jugs and jars,, and, less frequently,
bowls. Out of 107 burials, over 250 individual pots could be traced
and illustrated. Yortan itself is without any absolute date or
stratigraphy. Thus the only possible way to bring the site into the
established sequence of Anatolian and Aegean prehistory is by a com-
parative and to a lesser degree typological analysis. Three major
Anatolian sites, Troy/Hisarlik, Thermi and Beycesultan, are the major
source of the parallel material. In conclusion, Yortan appears-to
belong to a pottery culture of Early Bronze Age date that geographi-
cally occupies the north-west corner of Turkey, perhaps with its main
centre lying in the Balikesir region. Its westward extension reaches
the Aegean caost and the off-shore islands, ie. Lesbos, Chios. The
Gediz (Harmos) valley might define the immediate southern boundaries,
while in the North the celebrated site of Hisarlik, better known as
Troy, might well be a part of this inland culture, representing a
rather poor and coastal variant.
1
INTRODUCTION
In 1900 Paul Gaudin, an engineer in the employment of the
Ottoman Sultan, began to excavate a prehistoric cemetery at a location called Yortan near Gelembe, ca. 16.5 km north-east of Kirkagap and ca. 55 km south of Balikesir. In October of the
following year a more extensive digging was carried out, this time
with the assistance of V. Chapot from the French School of Athens.
Over one hundred burials were thus cleared out with an apparently
unsuccessful attempt to locate the settlement at the nearby cavdar
Tepe. Monsieur P. Gaudin's involvement in the field seems to have
come to an end at this point. In the following eighty years much has been said and written about Yortan, yet neither its chronologi-
cal limits nor meaning are clearly demonstrated while a term
"Yortan Culture" has become a-familiar though somewhat ill-defined
part of the Early Bronze Age of western Anatolia.
Two main reasons underlie the cause of this controversial interest in Yortan. First, Gaudin was never able to produce a full
publication of his work and only a brief report was presented to
1'Academie des Inscriptions at Belles-lettres in 1901 when some of the finds were also displayed before the members present. The
absence of a scientific report has naturally obscured many details
of the site, leaving many questions without definite answers. Neither the stratigraphy of the site nor the burial customs of the
Yortan people could be determined, and even the exact location of Yortan remained uncertain. Secondly, after the fashion of his times
Gaudin saw no harm in removing most of his finds out of Turkey and
in distributing them to various museums in Berlin, Brussels, Paris
and London. Thus it is now a very costly and time-consuming occu-
pation for anyone to attempt a study of the whole of the pottery
from Yortan. In 1936 K. Bittal and J. Stewart undertook to inves-
tigate the nearby site of Babaköy, then in the process of being
robbed by the villagers. This and a later research by K. KSkten
at Babaköy were very useful in the way of confirming some of the
2
burial customs that had become apparent at Yortan. A, full under-
standing of the culture involved was.,, however, frustrated by the
disturbed condition of the site. Some fragmentary pieces of pottery
and several complete pots from three intact tombs which had escaped the looters' attentions could reveal the identity of the site to be
very similar to that of Yortan but were not enough to present a
comprehensive knowledge on the pottery repertoire of the Yortan
Culture. ý 1.1 1
In this study the pottery. of Yortan cemetery is forýthe first
time presented in a nearly full form, together with two plans which
are faithful reproductions of Gaudin's original drawings available in blue print. The whereabouts of the originals and the rest of the pencil drawings of the burials are unknown to-the author. -With-
out the excavation report by. the excavator himself there are still
many questions to which satisfactory answers cannot be given today.
This is. however, no fault, of Monsieur Gaudin who worked with care.,
recording conscientiously, and was methodical and precise even by
present standards of archaeological investigations. His notes and'
sketches bear witness to work towards a full publication which some-
-, how never materialised. The fact that not all of the finds can today be referred to their original locations in the tombs is a
serious defect that lies: not with him but with those who were res-
ponsible for the good keeping of his records and finds. In this
endeavour to obtain a better understanding of Yortan, an effort has
been made to present as clearlyýas'possible almost everything that
was lifted from the site. The collection at St. Germain-en-Laye
makes a particularly important addition to various wares and shapes
which had long been noted from other and better known collections
but could not be fully analysed through lack of proper publications.
One is now also helped by. the more recent developments in the pre-
history of western Anatolia. Besides Blegen's published work at
Troy/Hisarlik there is a full Early Bronze Age pottery. sequence of
Beycesultan in the south-west and Yortan, situated in between these
two sites, can now be analysed in a comparative study without much
difficulty. Extensive surveys by D. French in the regions of
3
Balikesir, Akhisar and Manisa help to define the limits of-the
culture as represented at Yortan, and the preliminary reports from
the Karatq-Semayük excavations in the plain of Elmali and from
Sardis in the Gediz (Hermos) Valley throw further light on the
burial customs.
The main theme of the research is based-on"the material which
was excavated by P. Gaudin at Yortan and some care has been taken
not to confuse it with the so-called "Yortan Culture" pottery. Today this pottery from Yortan can easily be located in museum
registrations under the title of "Yortan" and as "presented by
P. Gaudin" or his widow. The latter group contains a selection of
pottery vessels which display features similar to those of Yortan
but can come from anywhere in a large area of the "Yortan Culture"
as defined in Chapter S. None of these often rare and exquisite
objects was scientifically excavated but all have come to be known
through the "mediation" of what one may describe as that immortal
parasite of ancient remains, the antiquity dealer. It iss there-
fore, with some regret that these plundered riches are included
here and have been done so only for the sake of demonstrating some
of the significant variations within the Yortan Culture itself.
The research was undertaken with the encouraging and most
stimulating supervision of Mr. J. Mellaart to whom the author also
owes most of the material illustrated in. Fig. 89-92,94. Such
a widely travelled research programme is well beyond the means of
an ordinary student and was made possible only by a generous grant
of L605.00 from the Central Research Fund of London University.
Various museum authorities were most generous and helpful in grant-
ing permission and facilities to study their collections. At the
Istanbul Archaeological Museums Dr. N. Asgari and Miss B. Aksoy
were helpful in every conceivable way; in London Dr. J. Curtis
and Dr. D. Collon of the British Museum offered all the necessary
assistance with friendship and patience, while Dr. R. Barnett kindly
informed me of the existence of the long forgotten plans in blue
print copies; subsequent to this discovery Mr. T. Mitchell very
4
generously allowed me to study them. In Brussels Prof. Dr. D.
Homes-Fredericq and Dr. C. Skinkel-Taupin of the Musses Roysux
d'Art et d'Histoire were most welcoming for their interesting
"Yortan Collection"; I owe my deep gratitude to Monsieur D. Beyer
and Mademoiselle A. Caubet of the Muses du Louvre for offering
valuable help and advice on the various Yortan Collections in the
museums in Paris. I thank Prof. J-L. Huot for allowing me to work
on the small collection it 1'Institut d'Archeologie Orientale,
Mademoiselle E. Fontan for the small but important group in the
Muses National de Ceramique at Sevres and finally Monsieur J-P. Mohen
without whose good will it would have been quite impossible to gain
access to the little known material in the Chateau de Saint-Germain-
en-Laye.
5
CHAPTER 1 BURIALS OF YORTAN CEMETERY
"Les fouilles revelerent'un alignement de jarres funeraires
exactement conforms a la direction du chemin, avec des-intervalles
generalement inegaux entre les pieces. Par endroits, 1'orifice
d'un des vases s'ouvrait sur Is fond d'un autre place an avant, Is lisiere du sentier, at ayant moms orientation. Des tranchees,...
furent ouvertes des-deux cotes de la route selon ces directions.
Les travaux ont bien montre qua Is chemin-'actuel etait is partie
centrals at la plus importante du champ'd'inhumation; ils ont aussi
fait decouvrir des prolongements suivant°la normale, on Est at an
Duest, at ant ete{pousses assez loin dans les directions diverses
pour donner une idea precise de 1'etendue de Is necropole antique
at reveler le trace approximatif de la peripheries
z ', Si les foui'lles n'ont titre poursuivies assez longtemps pour faire connaitre la totalite des objets qua recele la necropole, an
revanche elles permettent dejej, an raison du soin apporte aux
releves., de donner des renseignements sur ces objets at sur. leur
disposition.
i Ile as divisent en deux series: 1. les°grandes jarres ou
pithoi qui etaient de, veritables sarcophages; ', '2. Is mobilier fune-
raire contenu avec les corps dans les, jarres,...... "- °
"Les pithoi sont repartis dans le-champ sur un double aligne-
ment. La position qui lour a ate donnee est ä peu pros horizontale;
dans Is plupart des cas cependant., ils presentaient une legere in--
clinaison, be centre, de be base etant a un niveau un peu inferieur, a celui de l'orifice; et ainsi toutes ces jarres raises ä decouvert
dans lours trous, dont los rebords paraissaient los proteger,, t faisaient, avec leurs larges cols un peu redresses comme pour manager
une trajectoire., l'effet dune rangee de vieux obusiers en batterie.
C'etait bien Is lour disposition primitive. Ceux memes qui
6
ant ate brises la conservent encore. Le plus souvent on retrouve, intacte, la dalle large at plate, rectangulaire ou parfaitement
carree, qui bouchait l'ouverture du vase. L'orientation des pithoi
est partout sensiblement la memo; 1'orifice est tourne vers 1'Est,
at s'il ya parfois une legere deviation, alle nest jamais consi- derable.
Ces grandes jarres ont incontestablement joue Is role de sar-
cophages. La plupart recelaient des debris d'ossements, tellement
attaques at ranges par 1'humidite qua Is fait soul de los deplacer,
en lea maniant avec precaution, suffisait a las reduire a l'etat de
fine poussiere jaunatre. L'aspect de ces ossements, lour Couleur,
permettent d'ailleurs d'ecarter 1'hypothese de l'incineration.
Avec les debris humains., les jarres renfermaient une grande
quantite d'objets, des poteries an majorite. On ne saurait deter-
miner Is nombre moyen des pieces contenues dans chacune d'elles;
il variait de 1ä 16; mais il semble avoir ate an rapport avec Is
nombre des corps deposes dans cheque jarre, at plusieurs d'entre
elles ont certainement servi de sepulture ä plusieurs corps. nl
These well-known general observations of P. Gaudin can now be
fully established as archaeological facts through the plans of the
excavation and the sketch drawings of each pithos burial (Fig. 1-11)
Besides a few minor omissions, is* no. 42 burial missing on Plan II,
or the absence of heights on the contour lines, the plans of the
area and the excavations are remarkably precise. Clearly Gaudin's
engineering background was to his advantage, giving him all the
technical training which had not yet been fully introduced into the
study of antiquities. The circumstances surrounding the beginnings
and the end of the excavations are not known. It seems that
Gaudin's attention was drawn to the site by the discovery of some
1. M. Collignon., 1901, CRAI: 810 ff.
7
of the burials by the villagers, and in the course of two seasons'
digging he was able to locate and examine one hundred and
seven burials in pithoi or jars mainly lying under the Kirkaga5 - Gelembe road. Several trenches laid out perpendicular to the road
show that the distribution of the burials over the gently rising
ground is uneven, that while nothing was discovered on the south-
eastern section there is every possibility of finding a lot more
burials in the north-eastern parts towards Kelembe. Also the area to the north of the road and beyond the rocks at the smaller Kirkaga9 - Kelembe route could be holding a part or the rest of the
cemetery, (Plan II),; Obviously a thorough exploration of such a
sprawling burial ground is a costly and time-consuming undertaking
which for one reason or another could not be maintained by Monsieur
Gaudin beyond the second season.
More difficult to explain is the extension of, the excavations to the small mound of cavdar Tepe ("Tchavdar Tepe" on Plan I).
There is no detailed plan or recording of the four trenches opened
up near. the summit. One trench is a square-sounding-on the east
side and was probably unproductive. The other three'are in a
cluster on the south-east side. Two of'the trenches are in the
form of curving parallel lines, on the circumferences of two circles,
and the third is a narrow straight trench placed independently and
on the radius of the circles. This curious cluster of trenches
shows the intriguing but obscure detail of three pithoi, two up-
standing and a third lying horizontally in a'. north-south direction
(Plan I). Without the notes of the excavators I am unable to see
the purpose of this work; it could be that on ýavdar Tepe further
prehistoric remains, possibly the settlement site of the cemetery,
were discovered; or the illustration of the three trenches,
repeated on both plans and marked with a radius of six metres for
the circular trenches is meant to be the scale to the plans.
The illustrations of each burial on graph paper and to the
scale of 1: 10 cm-are equally-precise. The-contents of each jar or-
pithos is sketched out, including the human bones, and one may well
8
assume that with such careful recordings and illustrations the
excavators were also able to keep notebooks with a consistent
numbering system that related each object to individual tombs.
It is, therefore., all the more regrettable that today these notes
are not available, and the museums to whose custody the finds were
passed on have lost the numbering systems. Perhaps the most serious
omission in Gaudin's excavation methods is the lack of any strati-
graphic recording which may have produced results in agreement or disagreement with the three-fold classification of the pottery.
2
On the other hand it could be argued that since the depth of the
soil deposit which held the burials is only 1.00 m, to 1.50 m,, it
would have been largely irrelevant for chronological purposes, the
later burials (with Class C pottery) not necessarily occurring in
shallower levels. It is more likely that the growth and expansion
of the grounds was gradual, and different parts were used in differ-
ent periods so that one can propose the existence of three broadly
separate locations within the general boundaries of the cemetery,
where in each such location one of the three classes of the pottery (Class A, 8o C) may have been in the majority. Naturally our inability to refer the finds to the burials limits this view to a
mere hypothesis which today can be confirmed only by a thorough
investigation of another nearby cemetery.
With the nature and limitations of the available records out-
lined, one may proceed to demonstrate, in conjunction with other
broadly contemporary sites of western Anatolia, the burial habits
of the Early Bronze Age people at Yortan. A quick glance at the
site plans at once reveals an interesting detail, that the choice
of grounds for the burials lay on a rocky terrain. In one place,
south of the road., the pithoi are actually situated around several
small outcrops of rock. This disposition of the pithoi immediately
brings to mind the observation that in the Cyclades the lay-out of
2. See Chapter 2y p. 24-
9
the cemeteries is suited to the physical formation of the terrain
with the rock outcrops used to divide the burial ground into sepa-
rate pockets of burials. 3 If we are correct in speculating a west-
ward extension of the Yortan necropolis, then a similar disposition
of burials becomes apparent at Yortan as well.
The investigations at nearby Babaköy, which may be considered
a cemetery site identical to Yortan, were carried out by K. Bittel
and J. R. Stewart in 19364 and later by K. Kdktan in 1949.5 Unfor- tunately Bittel's attention was drawn to this site by the news of illicit diggings so that the results obtained were largely based on robbed tombs and are, therefore limited in scope. In both cases the scholarly interest in the site appears to have been a restrained one which did not go as far as a proper survey of the area. Two
prehistoric sites at Sardis on the shores of Marmara Gölü (Lake
Gygean), 6 and tombs and habitation deposits at Karata? -Semayuk in
the Elmali plain? are the most recent and better investigated
sites. a Karatap is particularly important in offering a unique
combination of archaeological data; this is as yet the only Early
Bronze Age site in western Anatolia where both the cemetery and the
settlement levels standing side by side have been carefully and scientifically excavated. The location of the Elmali plain among the mountains of Lycia and not necessarily on the'main current of contemporary cultures may raise doubts over the validity of the
comparative material from the site. Moreover this plain belongs to
the south-west cultural province of Anatolia, which is in many ways
3. C. Doumas, 1977, St. A. 48: 31 ff. 4. K. Bittel, 1939, A. f 0.13: 1 ff. 5. I. K. Kökten, 1949, Bell. 13: 811 ff. 6. D. G. Mitten and G. YU4r6m, 1974, Arch. 270 no. 1: 22 ff; 1971,
HSCP 75: 191 ff; D. G. Mitten, 1968, BASOR 191: 6 ff. 7. M. J. Mellink, 1964, AJA 68: 272 ff; 1965, AN 69: 241 ff;
1966, AN 70: 246 ff; 1967, AJA 71: 253 ff; 1968, AJA 72: 254 ff; 1969, AJA 73: 319 ff; 1970, AN 74: 345.
8. A large necropolis at Midas City ought to be added to the list. It was excavated by H. ýembel and is yet to be published. See C. H. E. Haspels (1971) The Highlands of Phrygia I. p, 285, no. 3.
10
different from the Early Bronze Age of the North-west Where Yortan
is situated. Yet such strong regional variations as those observed in the pottery traditions do not seem to have persisted in the
burial customs and cultic beliefs where instead there is a remar- kable uniformity throughout the Early Bronze Age of Western Anatolia.
Everywhere, except at Issas on the south-west coast, the method
of burial is predominantly in pottery vessels, large and small, and in extra-mural cemeteries outside the settlements. There is cer - tainly no mention of architecture at Yortan or Babaköy while at Beycesultan and Troy /Hisarlik the graveyards were clearly outside the settlements and are yet to be found. -A few child burials in
jars and deposited under the house floors are the only exceptions to this rule. At Sardis the pithos and cist graves seem to be mixed
with some habitation deposits but not with any architecture. 9
Presumably, therefore, as at Karatap-Semaybk, the burial ground had
encroached upon an-abandoned domestic quarter of the settlement but
at no one time did the living and the dead share the same ground, 10
Further confirmation of-this fact in the burial tradition of-western Anatolia is found at Ovabayindir in the plain of Balikesir. In
1956 a brief excavation was carried out on one of the two small
mounds on either side of the ' Degirmenderesi. 11 The sounding revealed the remains of a rectangular house and a child burial in a jar under the house floor. But the large and rich pithos graveyards of this
and other settlements of the area lay elsewhere outside the settle-
ments. 12 This widespread tradition of the extra-mural cemeteries
is, in fact, -not limited to the: Early Bronze Age but-continues into
9. D. G. Mitten and G. YUgrüm, 1974, Arch. 27: 25; 1971, HSCP 75: 191 ff.
10. M. J. Mellink, 1969, AJA 73: 319; T. S. Wheeler, 1974, AJA 78: 416.
11. E. Akurgal, 1958, Anatolia 3:, 156 ff. 12. Ibid., p. 157. The team was able to see some intact but many
robbed burials in the village of Ovabayindir and outside it. Also some at Mandraköy (Yeniköy), 10 km south-east'of Ovabayindir.
11
the Second Millenium BCC together with the use of pottery vessels
as coffins. Several such tombs were found in the Middle Bronze Age
deposits at Karataq-Semayük. 13 The cemeteries at Gordion near
Yassi HUyük14 and Yanarlar near Afyon15 are from the Old Hittite
period. The former site contains a mixture of cist graves, simple inhumations and pithoi, but the Yanarlar burials are exclusively in
pithoi.
Gaudin's excavation plan (Plan II) shows one hundred and seven burials, but only one of these vessels could be traced today. 16
It is said to be the largest example found on the site and measures
ca. 1.75 m in height and over 1.00 m in diameter at the widest
part. Smaller vessels must have been used for infants and children (Fig. 4p 59 6y 9). At Babaköy one such burial is no. 1.17 At
Karatag-Semayük out of some five hundred tombs a large number belong
to infants and children in smaller jars 18 and it is logical to
assume the presence of the same practice at Yortan as well. Ironi-
cally, the origins and development of long lasting and distinctly
west Anatolian pithos burial tradition are yet to be discovered.
The earliest known jar burials are at Beycesultan Level XXII, two
children in coarse ware vessels. 19
Of roughly the same date are
several jar burials of children at Kephala on Keos where a small cemetery contains the earliest known built graves of the Aegean*
20
A data in the Late Neolithic of the Cyclades, between the Saliagos
Culture and the Pelos phase, makes Kephela ancestral to the well-
known cast graves of the Early Cycladic period. 21 The presence of
these jar burials among the stone graves can be interpreted in
13, M. 3. Mellink, 1967, AJA 71: 257; 1969, AN 73: 330. 14. M. 3. Mellink (1956) A Hittite Cemetery at Gordion,. p. 3 ff. 15. K. Emre (1978) Yanarlar. A Hittite Cemetery near Afyon, 16. CVA no. 31 Brussels, Belgique. Pl. 4. no. 16. 17. K. Bittel, 1939, A. f 0.13: 9. 18.3. L. Angel,, 1976, AN 80: 388. 19. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan I, p. 26. 20.3. E. Coleman (1977) Keos. I. Kephala, P. 44 ff. 21. Ibid., p. 109 ff.
12
terms of contacts with western Anatolia where-the custom could
have already become established and had; even overflowed onto the
islands. 22'. On-the other hand it is essential to make"a distinction
in the attitude of the ancients towards-aýdead child and a dead
adult; -in the former case there seems to have been the practice
of burying a dead child in a jar, intra-murally or extra-murally,
without a fuss or ceremony'while in the latter-case the use-of a
proper burial jar of specific-details was the established custom.,
-The former habit was naturally practised almost-anywhere from ... Greece and the Balkans to Syria, 23
using any largish pot or jar but not necessarily being associated to>the traditions of burying
adults in pithoi or other types of graves. In-other words it was
one thing to put a dead infant or, child away under=the-floor in a
convenient pot and another matter to bury-regularly the population
, of a settlement-in large., sometimes colossal vessels which had to
be manufactured'especially for this purpose. -- The presence of a few
jar burials with children on Keos or-elsewhere'on, the islands may therefore not imply-a=knowledge or acceptance of the pithos burials
of Yortan or other Anatolian sites. So far Kos has produced the
only burials24 that can be considered true pithoi beyond western Anatolia in the Early Bronze Age of theýAegean. -- In-the East - several sites in Central Anatolia.. - ie. Ahlatlibel, Aligar, KUltepe -
. are well supplied with such tombs together with-other types. 25
Beyond Anatolia the Byblos cemetery of the "Eneolithic" period
comes nearest-to resembling the west Anatolian examples. 26
22. T. S. Wheeler, 1974, AN 78: 423, 23. A similar opinion is expressed also by T. OzgUq in relation to
Kusura and Aligar burials. See Die Bestattungsbraeuche im Vorgeschichtliche Anatolien (1948), pp. 28p 29. For a list of burials in Anatolia see T. S. Wheeler, 1974, AAA 78: 425.
24. L. Morricone,, 1950, B. d. A. 35: 324. One. may also assume that other Eastern islands along the Anatolian coast - Lemnos, Chios, Samos - were familiar with the burial method.
25. T. ÖzgUq. op. cit., 'pp. 22-41. 26. T. S. Wheeler, 1974, AN 78: 421 ff.
13
In'. this study the Yortan burials which had contained the "A"
Class pottery are dated to the EB1 period at the earliest, and
this is also the earliest date which can possibly be ascribed to
any of the known Anatolian pithos cemeteries. The pithoi, often
over 1.00 m in height, some sometimes over 2.00 m at Karate? -
SemayUk, 27
show quite an advanced potter's technology capable of
giving a sturdy red/orange fabric and shaping the vessel to such
particular details that suit its purpose admirably well. Naturally
one suspects a long chain of development which reached perfection
at the E81 period, at least in certain parts of western Anatolia.
Hacilar near Burdur is the nearest excavated early site, and no
such burial was found there. The odd twenty-two skeletons buried
in Settlements VI-I were in simple, oval pits cut into the earth. 28
The only traces of the later burial customs that can possibly be
traced back to the site are the extra-mural position of the cemetery
and the introduction, for the first time, of pottery into the scanty
burial gifts. 29
Somewhat blemished pottery burials at Kusura which
show such coarse habits as covering the dead with broken sherds of
pottery or halving a jar and then placing the two halves end to end
to cover the whole body30 could be considered an early stage in this
development. However, the pottery (Class A) recovered from the
graves does not look particularly early and such less distinguished
methods of burials may well be explained as due to the poorer eco-
nomy or craftsmanship of the people who could not always build or
afford the larger pithoi.
Gaudin's observation that all the pithoi were placed to the
same alignment can now be seen on the excavation plan(plan II).
In all the tombs the opening is turned to the south-east, east- or
north-east, that is to say the orientation of the cemetery is an
east-west direction. This consistency in the direction of the
27. M. J. Mellinks 19650 AN 69: 243; 1967t AN 71: 253. 28. J. Mellaart (1970) Excavations at Hacilar, p. 88 ff. 29. Ibid. p p. 89 ff. 30. W. Lambs 19369 Archaeologia 86: 55.
14
Yortan-burials is in fact a general rule applying to all other
Early Bronze Age burials of western Anatolia. At Babaköy, both
Bittel and Kökten were able to note this custom in the intactýas
well as the robbed graves. 31 Similarly, the'rule is invariably
the practice at Sardis-Ahlatli Tepecik, 32 Sardis-Eski Balikhane, 33
Aphrodisias, 34 and Karatap-Semayük.
35 Even at Iesos where the
cist graves were in use, suggesting affinities more in the direc-
tion of the Cyclades than Anatolia, a large number of the tombs
are placed more or less towards the sun rise. 36 The custom does
not survive into later ages. The Yanarlar pithoi are without a
consistent direction37 while at Gordion only the'pithoi are more
or less to the same alignment, south-east to north-west. 38
The stone cist graves which take the form of a rectangular or
round box, lined and covered with flat slabs of stone, are not
reported from the North-west. Only one burial at Yortan, no. 80
(Plan'II f Fig. 9 )' may be a sort of cist grave where
besides the flat stone lid two more slabs were placed along either
side of the incomplete pithos, probably as supports for its weakened
structure. Otherwise Sardis-Ahlatli'Tepecik would appear to be
the most northern occurrence of this Cycladic type of grave. 39
Their absence at Karata$-Semayük is noticeable but they are found
at the more inland site of Kusura. " The one exception to the -
31, K. Bittel, 1939, A. f 0., 13: 5 ff; I. K. Kökten, 1949, Bell. 13: 812.
32. D. G. Mitten and G. Yügrüm, 1974, Arch. 279 no. 1: 26. 33. D. G. Mitten and G. YU rüm, 1971, HSCP 75: 34. B. Kadish, 1921, AJA 75: 126. 35. M. J. Mellink, 1964, AJA 68: 271. 36. D. Levi, 1965-66, ASAA 27-28: 516. But one exception to this
rule in western Anatolia occurs at Kusura where disturbed burials were oriented to the West. See W. Lamb, 1936, Archaeologia 86: 55.
37. K. Emre (1928) Yanarlar. A Hittite Cemetery near Afyon. p. 16. 38. M. 3. Mellink (1956) A Hittite Cemetery at Gordian. p. 3. 39. D. G. Mitten and G. Yiirüm, op. cit., p. 26. Two cist graves
were found at Babaköy, but K. Bittel dated them to historic
times. See 1939, A. f 0.13: 10.
15
exclusive use of the pithoi and jars-in-the north-west cemeteries
is the remarkable finds reported-from Dorak on the southern shores
of Lake Apolyant. There, apparently two individuals were found
deposited in two pithoi, but two other persons, perhaps a "royal
couple". lay in state in richly furnished shallow-graves with
stone linings. 40 These graves differ from the-Cycladic or Iasos
cists and are more like the royal tombs of Alaca HUyük. 41
According to the finds at-Karatag-Semayük the stump or-round base of the pithoi was placed into a hole dug into the base rocks42 thus anchoring the vessel to the ground. The rest of the vessel lay at a slight angle rising gently to the ground surface and with., the neck and mouth facing the East. These particulars in shape and disposition of the pithoi wares one suspects, deliberately
designed to facilitate the deposition of the dead-and of the offer- ings. The-size and weight of some of these vessels are such that
their transportation for long distances would have been a very laborious, if not an impossible, task and therefore one may safely
assume that the entombment of the dead, and the offerings took place
at the side of the grave after the empty jar had been put into
position. Also the distance between the potter's grounds where the
the pithoi and jars were manufactured, presumably at the site of - the settlement, and the cemetery could not have been very consider- able. an these assumptions one may conclude that each settlement site marked on the map also indicates a-nearby. burial ground, and the settlements of-Yortan and Babaköy cannot be far off.
The slight remains of the Yortan skeletons were not instructive
40. J. Mellaart, 1959, ILN 28 November: 754 ff. _ 41. H. Z. Kopay (1951) Alaca Hüyük Ka2isi. 1937-1939. 'p. 53.,
Pl. CXV-CCVII. . 42. M. J. Mellink, 19649 AJA 68: 272.
16
for the excavator, 43
while at the'disturbed Babaköy cemetery only
a few features concerning the details of the position of the body
could be obtained. Indeed, at the latter site the disorderly
state and inadequately preserved condition of the skeletons led Kbkten to consider the possibility of the tombs containing only the secondary burials, 44
where an earlier stage of the funerary
rite would involve decomposing the corpse elsewhere outside the burial jar. Outside' Anatolia this process of excarnation away from the final burial place has been suggested for the rectangular ossu- aries of East Crete and cist graves of Aghios Kosmos in'Attica. 45
At Yortan Kökten's view finds some confirmation in the drawings of Gaudin where only the skulls of the human remains are indicated. However, better preserved and more carefully recorded Sardis and Karatap finds now stand to eliminate this opinion. As Bittal could observe on the meagre remains of the Babaköy skeletons,
46 the deceased was invariably tucked into-the pithos intact and left to
rest in a contracted position on one side. The head pointed to the East and the feet to the West. Often one tomb could be'used for
several persons. In such cases the remains of the previous indi-
vidual would simply be brushed to the lower, narrower end of the jar and thus room would be made for the newcomer. The Babakby
pithoi are said to contain two or three individuals. At Yortan the
record figure is six in no. 23 pithos (Plan II 0 Fig. 3) which has a very broad mouth and shoulder. But here two persons per tomb appears to have been the more-common practice. At Karatal the greatest number is eight in Tomb 112 of the Main Cemetery. 47
43. T. S. Wheeler, op. cit., gives a reference to a study a? some Yortan bones on p. 420, no. 51. Presumably the article in question deals with a few human bones that were given to the Brussels collection together with the large pithos, see p. 11 above.
44. I. K. K6kten, 1949, Bell. 13: 813. 45. C. Renfrew (1972) The Emergence of Civilisation. p. 429,430. 46. K. Bittel, 1939, A. f 0.13: 6. 47. M. 3. Mellink, 1965, AJA 69: 243.
17
At Yortan"and elsewhere pottery is by far the most common type
of object given-to the dead. Metal finds are very rare, possibly
indicating that still in the E81 and early EB2, which is the date
preferred here for. the majority of the burials, metallurgy had B.
limited spread in western Anatolia. 48 One or two tombs were fur-,
nished with three flat-marble figurines, 49 and some others with
terracotta spindle whorls. 50 At present there is no evidence for
the offering of food in the way of animal meat or fruit. In fact,
bowls which would normally serve as containers for such offerings
form a relatively small-number of vessels from the burials. Jars
and jugs are present in much larger numbers, possibly suggesting
cultic beliefs more in the direction of libations and offerings of
liquids than solid food.
It has been'suggested that the pottery of Yortan and other
cemeteries could be special groups of, vessels belonging to the
dead and not representative of the wares found onýthe settlement
sites. 51
The opinion held here is that among the fifteen shapes.
of Class-A pottery only a few shapes can be considered as such
while-the-remaining majority., including Class"B and C vessels, need
not be-so in their basic forms and wares. The smallest vessels,
the juglets, are surely miniature versions of Shape X and XII jugs
and were-probably-ntoysn for children, living or dead. The same
purpose may apply also to the small bird-shaped jugs. The larger
examples and the triple jars, Shape XV, on the other hand, may well
be objects of the-cult and are found on settlement sites as well as
in burials. Jars of Shape II form another distinct and popular
shape of small vessels. Some-of them were-found to contain a-red/
orange coloured substance and were probably containers of some
cosmetics or a special stuff such as red or yellow ochre used in
48. See Chapter 2p p. 39 49. See Chapter 2#-p. 3A- 50, See Chapter 29 p. 37 51. See Chapter 3p p. q7
18
the cult of the dead. Such a custom is well illustrated at the
Neolithic site of catal HUyUk where in some of the burials the
skull and/or skeleton were smeared with red paint. 52
At Yortan
and Babakdy the skeletons were-found in poor condition of preser-
vation, and without hard evidence the point cannot be verified for
the Early Bronze Age. A similar situation is confronted in the
Cycladic graves where marble bowls and palettes have been found
with, remains of a red pigment. 53
The limited space inside the pithos tomb and the adverse
physical conditions for-the preservation of the organic matter
obscure the exact position of the offerings in relation to the
contracted skeleton; or probably no particular significance was
attached to such as arrangement. One can only suppose that such
objects as. "toys" were possibly placed near or into children's hands to keep them happy or preoccupied after life. With the
delivery of the offerings one may imagine the burial ceremony drew
to an-end and was completed by the sealing of the pithos mouth and the inhumation of the whole tomb. At Yortan slabs of stone, trimmed to regular shapes, are reported for enclosing the pithoi
mouths. Some other means such as a large pottery bowls or large
pieces of sherds may also have been used as "lids". Such vari-
ations are reported from Sardis-Ahlatli Tepecik54 and Karatq-
SemayUk,, 55 but Gaudin does not specify any at Yortan. Once the
cover was placed into'positionq the packing stones would be heaped
up against its a few more vessels could still be offered among the
stones, and finally the tomb would be buried-and levelled off. At
Karataq the pithos mouth was-marked by a "retaining" wall of field
stones (Plan`II ). This feature is absent at Yortan where also
52. J. Mellaart (1967) Cata1 Hüvük. A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. p. 2072 209.
53. C. Doumass 1977" St. M. A. 58: 58. 54. D. G. Mitten and G. Yü rüms 19742 Arch. 27: 26. 55. M. J. Mellinkp 19649 AJA 68: 271; T. S. Wheelers 1974; AJA
78: 417.
19
the stone lids do not seem to have been secured into place with
packing stones. The fact that whether at'Yortan or Karataf, these
graves could be found and opened ups or new ones sunk into the
ground without disturbing the existing ones, shows that some means
of markings above the ground were utilised to indicate the exact location of each burial. ' This is one aspect of the prehistoric
cemeteries which often proves impossible to clarify. Any evidence for such markers would normally lie directly'above the ground and thus would easily be swept away in the passage of time. At Babaköy
Bittel thought the stone lids stood higher than the top of the
pithos rim and therefore could have functioned as surface markers* 56
It is a plausible explanation but it fails to take into account certain details. Not all the covering stones were apparently shaped to stand above the pithoi and the ground level; it is difficult to imagine how, for example, the square slabs of Yortan would have functioned in this way, while other types of "lids" such as bowls
could not have served a purpose as such at all. Instead a com- pletely different explanation is now provided by the Karate? finds
which may well be accepted as yet another widespread feature of the
west Anatolian burials. At this site most of the burials also lay
very close to the ground surface and were often damaged by natural agencies and human action. Much careful and patient work, however,
eventually bore its reward, and in Trench 98 the ancient ground sur- face was uncovered in good condition and with slight remains of circular structures. 57 The subsequent stratigraphic work showed that each such structure actually belonged to a pithos burial
(Plan II ). With such unique evidence at hand we may now imagine the cemetery at Karataq as a large, sprawling ground stand- ing outside the immediate bounds of the settlement, and marked with
pockets of circular structures on slight stone foundations. Whether
the Karate? method of marking was used elsewhere remains to be
56. K. Bittely 19399 A. f 0.13: 49 5. 57. M. J. Mellinkg 1968x AJA 72: 255; 1969.9 AJA 73: 319 ff.
20
confirmed by future research. The'use of other methods outside
Anatolia is noteworthy. At Aghioi Anargyroi on Naxos, for example,
a cemetery of twenty two cist graves was surrounded by an enclosing
wall and each burial is thought to have been marked with flat
stones on the ground surface. 58 At Akrotiri on the other hand a
platform-like structure on the cap stone was found to function-in
this way. 59 At Yortan the necessity of surface markers was realised
in order to explain the orderly arrangement of the gravesq"but no
particular feature was identified as such.
58. C. Renfrew (1972) The Emergence of civilisation, p. 158. But this aspect of the cemetery seems to be in doubt, see T. S. Wheeler, op. cit., p. 423.
59. C. Doumas, -op. cit., p. 36s 87; C. Doumas (1977) Art and Culture of the Cyclades, ed. J. Thimme, p. 35.
21
CHAPTER 2 FINDS FROM YORTAN CEMETERY
a) Pottery
Large-pithoi and smaller jars serving as funerary urns, and
the much smaller vessels buried with the dead form the main type
of objects found at Yortan. The pithoi are naturally heavy,
coarse vessels and, with the exception of a few, they were appa-
rently not lifted for the museum collections. Today only one
example is known to exist and it belongs to the collection of the
Musses Royaux d'Art at d'Histoire in Brussels. 1 Several more are
said to be registered in the inventory of the Berlin museums 2
The Brussels pithos is a spacious container measuring ca. 1.75 m in height. The neck is short and-broad. The diameter measures largest, over 1.00 ms at the rim. The body is equally broad in
the upper half and narrows down to and in a pointed but blunt base.
There are four loop handles and four knobs on the shoulder, such
projections probably functioning as grips for manoeuvring the
"coffin" into the desired position. The fabric is coarse, reddish brown in colour, and tempered with gravel. Technically it is
highly competent work, shaped with considerable skill and fired to
a hard, sturdy structure. For the remaining one hundred and six burials we have to be content with Gaudin's words and drawings:
"Dans la seconds cite d'Hissarlik., Schliemann avait decouvert
des centaines de jarres mesurant de 1.5 a2 metres de hauteur.
Cellos de Porten ont des proportions un peu inferieures. La
longueur totale approche rarement de 2 metres, et is diametre ne
depasse 1 metre, a la panse, que dans peu de cas. On a pu noter., a titre de feit isole, uns paroi de 55 millimetres, et las plus
1. F. Mayence and V. Verhaagen, CVA no. 30 Belgique, Pl. 4p no. 16. 2. W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 24.
22
fortes epaisseurs sont d'environ 0.4 m. Le parement exterieur est
rugueux, at la quality de la poteris, oü l'argile est melee de
gravier, est an general mediocre. Le col est souvent tres large,
mais peu evase. Certains vases sont presque spheriques, mais lea
formes allongeees sont los plus frequentes. L'extremits oppose
au col nest parfois qu'une points mollement arrondie mais Is
plupart sont munis dune sorts d'arete circulaire qui pout jouer
Is role dune base. Sur 1'epaule se profilent diverses saillies, los unes an forme d'anse, lea autres, rondes at deprimees au centre,
qui sont pout-etre une grossiere imitation de certaines parties
du corps humain, comme los yeux at is nombril, "3
It seems that'Gaudin made scaled drawings of all the excavated tombs, together with their contents. Fig. 1-11-are
reproductions of some of these drawings. Out of the total of one hundred and seven tombs some eighty three could be found in these
illustrations. The whereabouts of the remaining twenty four are not known. Obviously the pithos shape had a slow evolution and was a deliberate creation to suit the purpose of accommodating the
contracted corpse of a human, together with the burial gifts. 4
The narrower, lower end would contain the decomposed remains of an older occupant of the tomb while the more spacious upper parts would be for the intact newcomer. The excavators of the Karataq- Semayük cemeteries could observe that such funerary pithoi were,
made exclusively for the burials and. not used for other purposes. 5
Only the smaller jars for infants. and children might have been
ordinary domestic utensils as well.
A classification of the Yortan pithoi into some five shapes
is based on the overall form of the body, and it must be admitted
3. M. Collignon, 1901, CRAI: 812. 4. See Chapter 1p p. 13 5. M. 3. Mellink, 1964, AN 68: 275. T. 0zgüg was able to make the
same remark for the Kusura, Alijar pithos burials. See Die Bestattungsbraeuche im Vorgeschichtliche Anatolien (1948), p. 25,9 313 32.
23
that the differences between the groups are often rather slight
and arbitrary. The first shape is quite easy to recognise, con-
sisting of smaller jars of globular or slightly elongated body
(Fig. 12 ). There is nothing particular about them to suggest
a special production for the graveyard. Shapes 22 32 4 and 5 are
all very similar and differ only slightly' in the proportions of the height and width of the body; shape 2 vessels, big and small,
are rather narrow and elongated (Fig. 12-14); shape 3 is broad at the shoulder or middle body (Fig. 14-17); shape 4 consists of
pithoi with a distinctly conical body (Fig. '17-19)., while shape 5
can be distinguished by the markedly sunken profile of the section between the broad upper body and the much narrower base (Fig. 19-21).
The last group, shape 6. differs from the rest in having a stump
rather than a blunt and rounded base (Fig. 22 ). According to
Gaudin the Brussels pithos is the largest found at Yortan, 6 and
indeed the illustrated examples are never over 1.50 m in height.
These three pithoi found at Babakoy (Pl. '1 ) are bigger, almost 2.00 m in height, but the overall shaping is identical to those of Yortan. The Karate? pithoi of broadly the same shapes also tend to be taller, varying between 1.20 m and 1.80 m and even sometimes
exceeding 2.00 m. 7
The ornamentation of these colossal jars was
apparently unimportant and limited to a few simple plastic features.
Pointed knobs on the shoulder of the body are found on nos. 110 52v
03.9 04 (Fig. 2v 6,8); on nos. 26., 57j. 58 there is a single line of
the robe pattern (Fig. 39 7 ); and the "medallion motif"j, as it is
known at Karata?, occurs on'nos. 15., 38., 45 (Fig. 2.9 4,5). The
smaller jars, nos. 32 and 36 (Fig. '4 which may have originally
been made for purposes other than funerary, are more elaborately
ornamented with handles, knobs and bands. Some of the Karate;
pithoi were also incised on the upper body or round the neck. 8
6. Stated so in the registration of the pithos in the Musees Royaux d'Art at d'Histoire (Cinquantenaire) Brussels.
7. M. J. Mellink, 1964, AJA 68: 273; 1967, AJA 71: 253. 3. L. Angel, 1976, AN 80: 388, Table 2.
8. M. 3. Mellink, 1964, AN 68: 274; 1969, AJA 73: 321.
24
This type of decoration'is not reported from Yortan but it may be
worth pointing out that these urns lying directly in the ground
were probably heavily encrusted with lime which would have con-
cealed much of the finer surface decoration. In fact, Professor
Mellink was able to note this type of ornamentation at Karatap
only after the cleaning of the pottery, and we do not have reason to believe that conservation and cleaning of the pithoi'and jars
were undertaken at Yortan in 1901.
Now, eighty years after their first discovery, it isp of
course, impossible to trace all the objects that were brought out of the burials. However, with over two'hundred and fifty vessels which could be studied, the Yortan pottery makes an impressive and
significant addition to the Early Bronze Age of western Anatolia. In terms of shapes and such technical details as the colour and texture of the fabric the pottery can now be divided into three
classes,, -A., B. C. which correspond roughly to the E81, EB2 and E83
periods. Unfortunately this classification cannot be backed by
sound stratigraphic observations at the site, 9
and therefore
divisions between various groups must remain tentative. Between
A and Bp and 8 and C. there need not be rigid dividing lines, but
the pottery of A and C is truly different in every respect, leaving
little doubt as to the existence of a considerable chronological
and cultural difference between them.
Within Class A pottery, which is by far the most numerous
group containing two hundred and twenty four vessels out of a total
of two hundred and sixty three, three main types - bowls, jars,
jugs - and several more unusual forms, such as the triple vase, can
be distinguished. It is an exclusively handmade pottery without
the use of the potter's fast wheel. There is hardly any variation
in the fabric so that the shape rather than the ware or ornamentation
has been used to divide it into some'fifteen groups. The surface
9. See Chapter 1. p. 8
25
decoration was used as the-basis for such a classification for the
Louvre collection by E. Pottier, 10 but the method is-considered
unproductive and largely irrelevant here for the elucidation of the
problems surrounding the Yortan pottery and culture. The fabric
is always very high in. mineral content with a lot of mica and
quartz which on the surface appear as tiny, small, or large, shiny
particles. Often the surface of-the pots is pitted due to pieces having fallen out. On most of the larger vessels it is not a fine fabric, but very coarse examples are also rare. A more refined
clay and temper, still with the same mineral content, was often used for the smaller vesselh such as the juglets, Shape VI, or small jars., Shape II. No straw temper was detected in any of the
pieces examined. The petrological analysis of a fragment of a jar,
Shape III, gave the following results which can be taken as stan- dard for most of the Class A jars and jugs:
"The matrix is birefringent in shades of orange and yellow,
and contains sherds of muscovite and biotite mica. Other inclusions
are:
Horneblende 0.1/0.2-0.5 mm; occasional- Quartz 0.1/0.3 mm on average. Some grains are
less than 0.1 mm and subrounded;
scattered
Plagioclase feldspar 0.3/0.4 mm., subangular; occasional Pumice/volcanic glass 0.1/-0.5 mm; scattered Haematite 0.1 mm and less; scattered"
11
10, E. Pottier, CVA Louvre 4. France, no. 5: 3. 11. I am greatly indebted to Miss L. Johns of the Institute of
Archaeology, London, for this and other analyses of the pottery quoted in this research. I would also like to take the oppor- tunity to express my gratitude to Professor O-L. Huot who allowed me to take samples from the small collections of l'Institut d'Archeologie Orientale, Paris.
26
The firing temperature is about 800°C and sometimes the pots
easily crack, crumble, or flake off in layers. One exception to
this rule is provided by the jugs of Shape XI-XII where almost all
of the vessels are fired hard and do not crumble to pieces. These
deficiencies in the technique of the Yortan craftsmen did not, however, prevent the production of a highly attractive and indivi-
dual pottery, far superior to that found at Troy/Hisarlik or Thermi. This achievement was largely due to the competence in the
shaping of the vessels, to the pleasing and rounded contours, and also to the care taken in the surface finish. It is never left
coarse but smoothed, or more often slipped and burnished to a shining reflection.
12 Since all this pottery was handmade there is individuality in every piece, without a feeling of mass produc- tion. The shapes and their general outlook are vivid, unaffected by dull, metallic elements which in later periods come to dominate the pottery everywhere. Black and grey colours are clearly in the
majority. Those vessels which are in two-thirds . , 'red, brown,
or orange red colours, form a separate and parallel group of shapes but-are far fewer in number. Jug no. 25, Fig. 44 2 of Shape VIII
is a good example reflecting many characteristics of the "A" class
pottery; it has a coarse fabric but in its soft, rounded outline,
and slipped and burnished surface it makes an attractive object. Also the uniform red orange colour and the distinct chevron motif in matt white show success in the process of firing. In every detail of the shape, fabric and surface finish these red ware
vessels are in fact no different from the black or grey ones. The
following analysis was carried out on a fragment of the no. 25 jug,
Shape VIII. The results obtained are quite similar to those of
the above mentioned black jar, Shape III:
12. Without thin sections of every piece it is often difficult to see whether a pot was slipped or burnished' or merely self- slipped which is a process of smoothing that brings up the finer particles of the fabric.
27
"Red/brown fabric. ýBirefringent from orange to yellow..
Horneblende 0.2 mm; infrequent
Quartz 0.1-0.5 mm; ýangular, subangular and
subrounded; frequent
Polycrystalline quartz 0.2 mm; infrequent
Feldspar 0.5-0.1 mm; subrounded; occasional Pumice/volcanic glass 0.5-0.1 mm with a mean size of 0.3 mm;
frequent
Haematite 0.5-0.1 mm; scattered"
Among the small jugs, Shape IX, no. 16 (Fig. 47 ) is very striking in its uniform lustrous brown colour. The black-jug no. 6 (Fig. 47 )
of-the same shape. is similarly a fine piece. One of the smaller jugs of Shape IV, no. 3 (Fig. 320 P1. VI ) is. fired dark grey in
the upper section and light brown in the lower parts of the body.
Such a distinct-partitioning of a pot into two colour zones could be considered intentional, iee a-well-known feature of Early
Cypriots pottery. However, at Yortan such vessels are rare and
were probably accidental products. The predominance of the black
and grey wares in'Yortan "A" class pottery seems to be a wide
spread aspect of the north-west Anatolian culture in the EB1, and EB2 periods. Further south there is a clear increase in the pre- ference for lighter colours in shades"of.: red and brown. At Karataq-
SemayUk, for example, sturdy jugs in burnished red brown and some- times decorated with matt white linear patterns are a character- istic of the pottery of the Elmali plain.
13 Among the Yortan "A"
class pottery there is no apparent-chronological significance in
the occurrence of the red or red brown ware.
The ornamentation on the burnished or less often smoothed
surface is either in white filled incision or in the so-called
13, M. J. Mellink', 1964,9 AJA 68: 276.
28
matt white painting. Less common are the jugs with moulded relief
features only. The origins and distribution of the two former
methods of decoration is a rather complex phenomenon. In western
Anatolia it goes back-to the beginnings of the Late Chalcolithic
period of Beycesultan. 14 Beyond, in the Aegean, it is found in
the Middle Neolithic and Late Neolithic of the East Islands*15
of the Cyclades (Saliagos) 16 and of Greece, 17
with even earlier
appearance in the Neolithic of South East Europe. 18 Its distri-
bution in Anatolia is equally wide, extending from Mersin Level
XIIa to lkiz Tape in the plain of Bafra. 19 Yet without the
stratigraphic soundings penetrating into the earliest of the
Chalcolithic period it remains impossible to determine whether the
origins of this pottery style at Yortan"and elsewhere in western Anatolia were independent or derived from the East or West. It
would, however, be incorrect to assume a "floruit of the style"
preceding the=Troy I period (EB2). 20 The opinion has been based
on the poor representation of the pottery at Troy/Hisarlsk. Else-
where in this study it has been suggested that the pottery of Troy/
Hisarlik and Kumtepe occupy's precarious position-in the Early
Bronze Age of the North West, not necessarily representing the
complete pottery repertoire of the area. 21 Thus, while there may
be only a few white painted sherds in Troy'I and III in the contem-
porary Yortan pottery it-is in full blossom, and, a "floruit" of -
this type of ornamentation may well be in the EB1 and EB2 periods,
14, S. Lloyd and 3. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan It p. 81. ' 15. J. Mellaart., 1954, AS 4: 204;
_A, Furness, 1956,9 PPS 22:
174 ff. 16. A. Furness, op. cit.; 3. D. Evans and C. Renfrew (1968)
Excavations at Saliagosp p. 81 ff; J. E. Coleman, 1974, AJA 78: 334.
17. Ibid. 18.
_J. Deshayes, 1972, Arch. 25, no. 3: 201; 3. Yakar, 1975,
Tel Aviv 2: 142. 19,0. Mellaartp 1954, AS 4: 205 ff; 3. Yakar, 1975, Tel Aviv 2:
138 ff. 20, A. Furness, 1956, PPS 22: 205; J. Yakar, 1979, AS 29: 54. 21. See Chapter 3., p. 98-99
29
at least in north-west Anatolia.
At Yortan this type of decoration is always preferred for jars
and jugs., and there is little variation in the motifs used. Every
vessel has three or four chevrons applied onto the body only in
groups of two, three, four or five lines, and only a few jugs have
additional patterns. One jug with cutaway spout, no. 29 (Fig. 61 )
has double running lozenges, one on either side of the angular handle. Another, no. -14 (Fig. 47 ) of Shape IX has cross-hatched lozenges in between the chevrons.
The white-substance or paint is usually applied very thickly
so much so that at the apex of the chevron motif the overlapping lines stand out in relief. When hydrochloric acid was dropped on the white lines only, it gave a reaction in bubbles, indicating22
that_it is lime, probably limestone powdered and mixed with water. One is struck by the fact-that on almost every pot these white lines are considerably faded or washed out and they do not really
conform to a contrasting pattern upon the darker surface. Presum-
ably this was not the condition of the pottery at the'time. of its
production. One suspects that the white substance which would have been mixed with water and applied on the-already burnished
surface wore out over the millenia under such environmental factors
as the fluctuating ground water-table and the soil conditions. One exceptionally well preserved vessel is the incomplete jug no. 18 (Fig. 42 ) where somehow the chevrons have survived in a bright
white colour contrasting well with the burnished black background.
In some cases the mottled surface proves to be unsuitable for this
type of decoration; where, for example, light grey rather than
black colours are present the white lines do not'stand out at all
22, The same test was carried out'on the'Mersin white painted
- pottery. See J. Garstang (1953) Prehistoric Mersin. p. 183. "... a white pigment gives the bubble reaction of lime to a drop of hydrochloric acid. "
30
clearly(P1. IX, no. 13). Sometimes the pattern itself is in vague tones,,
varying between dirty white and light grey, which again tends to be
absorbed by a similar coloured background.
It seems that white painted pottery gradually went out of
favour towards the end of the EB2 period; at least, this is what
one finds at Troy/Hisarlik where it is no longer evident in Troy
III, and at Beycesultan where it disappears at the end of the EB2
levels. It must, however, be pointed-out-that-this pottery was
apparently not popular at either site at all times, and there is"
always the possibility of a longer sequence at Yortan and elsewhere. Class C pottery which. has been identified as EB3 in date does not have this type of jug or jar,, thus confirming its disappearance in
the North West after the EB2 period. Such unprovenanced jugs as
no. 32, (Fig. 94; Pl. XVIII)or no. 46 in Schiek and Fischer23 may be
dated on account of their shape-tot the end of E62, and the former
jug is decorated with white filled incisions suggesting that already
before the beginning of EB3 the somewhat frail painted ornamentation
was going out of favour in the Yortan Culture as well. On the other
hand the latter jug is still decorated with white chevrons, and in
fact white painted shards were found, at Polatli in late Phase I and
early Phase II which corresponds to Troy III-IV, 24
In Class A pottery incision is only used on small vessels, Shape III IVY Shape VI, and the small bird shaped jugs (Fig. 73 ).
The limited space on the surface was naturally unsuitable ground for painting. Small lids, Shape V9 which belong to the jars are
similarly decorated. A few incised exceptions among the larger
vessels are no. 6 (Fig. 29), a jar with a unique basket handle,
and an unusual jug, no. 6 (Fig. 76), 25 -This obvious restriction
in the shapes of the incised pots may have, however, been a local
23. S. Schick and F. Fischer, 1965, FS 17: Taf. 27.
'24. S. Lloyd and N. Gökge, 1951, AS 1: 46s 56. 25. See Chapter 3. p. S3 , 97
31
phenomenon, peculiar to Yortan and not a general feature of the
Yortan Culture. Thus, bowls no. 1,4 (Fig. 89 ) from the
Balikesir plain are identical in shape to the plain bowls of
Yortan, but some are incised or grooved on the carinated rim;
or the large jar., no. 37 (P1. XVII), though similar to Shape II
jars on tripod feet, is more like Shape III examples and yet it
is incised and not painted.
On the whole, the incision is very competent and executed before firing with a thin point in deep, steady lines. The motifs
are all linear, in various combinations of parallel or curvilinear lines, short strokes, dots, or wedge-shaped punctures. A white
paste was filled into the incised pattern to make it stand out over the burnished surface.
26 Among the juglets, Shape VI, no. 12 (Fig. 35 ) (Pl. XX ) is a perfect little vessel with the simple
white filled pattern showing clearly over a lustrous red brown
surface. Sometimes, however, defects in the firing process would
cause mottling and failure to create a striking contrast between
the pot surface and the incised pattern.
A third type of ornamentation found on Class "A" pottery con-
sists of simple plastic features in the form of knobs, prominent
or small and wart-like; crescents, parallel bars, or chevrons.
The most commonly used are the knobs, always placed on the upper
part of the body or, on the cut-away spouted jugs, on either side
of the neck. The crescents are often shallow in relief. Some are
quite small, no. 1 (Fig. 48 ), others large and sweeping, no. 14
(Fig. 54 ). One large jug, no. 8 (Fig. 51 ) has the more unusual
crescents, each divided in the middle by a perpendicular line.
Parallel bars are found in groups of two, three or four, no. 32
(Fig. 63), no. 28 (Fig. 61 ), no. 2 (Fig. 74). More interesting
26. Mr. J. Melleart informs me that some of the Balikesir incised patterns are actually filled in with yellow or red paste which is presumably red or yellow ochre.
32
are the small pendant like features stuck onto the base of the neck
at the front of the pot. This occurs only on jugs of Shape IX-X,
and XII. On jug no. 3 (Fig., 67 )-it is particularly vivid, resem- bling a pair of beads or, jewellery worn round the neck. At the
back, -below the handle, even the knot of the string from which the
"beads" would have been suspended is shown. A similar amusing
detail can be observed on jug no. 8 (Fig. 51'); here the "necklace"
worn is in the form of a string of knobs all attached to"the neck base with short strokes. Further up the neck, on either side and below the rim, are the usual knobs but here shaped in greater detail
recalling "earrings".
Vertical flutings as a mode of decoration covering the-whole-
or most of the body are rare at Yortan, occurring on three jugs
only. Jug no. 2(Fig. 45 ) is one of them and is really a small
version of the tall, handsome jug no. 38 (Pl. XIX) of unknown pro-
venance. Jug no. 3 (Fig. 75 ) (Pi. XIII) has rather prominent flutings. It is a heavy vessel and unique among"the Yortan shapes in its horizontal and broad form of beak-spout. The third vessel is the large bird vase no. 4 (Fig. 72 ). On two other jugs of-the latter shape, plastic lines are used sparingly to indicate "wings"
in a stylised fashion.
The second class of. Yortan pottery, "B"., contains a number of
vessels which on the basis of parallels with the pottery of Troy/
Hisarlik are identified as late E82 in date. The "teapot" or deep
bowl with a basket handle and side spout (Fig. 79) is a particularly
distinctive shape, unknown in the EBI of western Anatolia. Basic-
ally the most outstanding differences between this and the "A"
class are in the nature of the fabric and surface treatment. It
is a fine fabric and always fired hard. Light colour slip is
thinly applied and no longer highly burnished. Mottling occurs
but far less than in Class A. Such technical as well as stylistic
differences are considered sufficiently strong here to keep these
pots separate from the earlier group. However, without a strati-
graphic recording such division must naturally be kept flexible.
33
It is highly probable that some of the "A" class shapes continue to the end of the EB2 period. The carinated bowl with a loop
handle could be one such shape; or on typological grounds there
are the jugs of Shape X with a shallow and broad form of the cut-
away spout (Fig. 589 59) which is not too dissimilar to the tall
beak spout of the EB3 period. ' Those jars of Shape III with
sharper outlines, or jugs of Shape XI and XII could also be con-
sidered-later than the EB1 or early EB2. On similar lines a number
of vessels from the Balikesir plain may tentatively be dated to
this latter phase of the EB2 of Yortan. Jug no. 32(pl. XVIII )
has already been mentioned; it is a handmade, perfect product with
symmetry all round, and in every possible detail a superior and more developed pottery than Class A of Yortan. Secondly there are the small jars, no. 10-14 (Fig. 90 ) which on account of their tall
flaring pedestals and richly incised decoration could also be
regarded as typologically later examples of Shape IV. Yortan jars.
Class C pottery represents the EB3 period of the site and '
corresponds to the pottery of Troy III-IV and Beycesultan XII-X. Again as for the previous class, the number of vessels that can be assigned, with some confidence, to this category is rather small; but the break-with the Class A type is clear and absolute with no question of continuity. Almost all of these jars and jugs are made of a very fine fabric, still with a rich micaceous content. The
petrological analysis of a piece from jug no. 11 (Fig. 81 ) (Pl. XXI)
shows that a different deposit of clay might have been used at this time:
"Red fabric. The matrix is birefringent from orange to red
and is very micaceous. The mica appears to be muscavite.
Quartz 0.1-0.3 mm subangular; scattered
Polycrystalline quartz 0.4 mm; occasional Muscovite 0.2 mm; scattered
Biotite 0.2 mm; scattered
34
The walls are usually very thin, hard fired, and invariably
in light colours of red and grey. Due to the fine fabric the sur-
face is naturally very smooth. Often it is coated with a thin
slip, or wash, but never burnished to the extent of the "A" class
pots.. Except for the occasional grooved line there is no other
ornamentation. The potter's fast wheel is now in use with the
result of a greater degree of symmetry in the shaping. No. 9
(Fig. 80; Pl. XIV) is a very fine piece, made of an extremely fine
fabric and thin walls. Its proportions are faultless. This jug
and the lentoid flask, no. 14 (Fig. 82; Pl. XV ), do have a cut-
away type spout but one which is quite different from the earlier
examples; the neck is rather tall and cylindrical, and the part
of the spout cut away is quite small without giving it a beak-like
appearance. In the absence of a larger group of material it is, of
course, not possible to draw the general characteristic of the
Yortan pottery during this period. The available twenty pieces are
barely sufficient to allocate the site to this period, and we can
only speculate that the E63 pottery of Yortan was not very different
from that of the rest of western Anatolia. -
b) Idols and Figurines
Only three idols were found at Yortan. 27
Two illustrated
examples, Pl. XVI, , are in white marble, highly schematised,
and of types widely known in the Aegean. The larger no. 1 is in
the "fiddle" shape with a long., stalk-like projection representing
the neck and head. The lower part., or the body, is featureless,
and only the shoulders or arms are indicated as small protrusions.
Some thirteen similar idols were found at Beycesultan in the shrine
complex of Level XVIIb. 28
Two rather crude pieces from Thermi I
27. M. Collignons 19019 CRAI: P1.1. 28. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan I. P. 2669 269.
35
and II., 29 and two broken pieces from Troy I and II30may all be
considered as basically belonging to this shape. The second
Yortan idol is even more schematised and was made of a piece of flat marble with the two ends rounded and the middle part notched
on either side to indicate the waistline or neck. At Beycesultan
one broken piece in Level XVI could be of this types 31 otherwise
it is not found on this site. Plenty of examples are known at Troy/Hisarlik in all periods. The Karatal-Semayük burials here
also yielded identical idols, 32 though here and probably in the
Burdur - Isparta region at large a different type, the "Kusura"
idol with a stalk neck and disc head was more popular. 33 So far
this variety has not been found in the North West in large
numbers. 34
Outside Anatolia both of the Yortan idols find fairly close
parallels in the Aegean, particularly in the Cyclades. 35 The
earliest occurrence of the fiddle type is at Saliagos which dates
to the beginning of the Beycesultan Late Chalcolithic. 36 The
second Yortan idol which is actually incised on one side could have its beginnings in the simple flat pebbles of Poliochni. 37.
..
Such a wide distribution of these objects is in sharp contrast
29, W. Lamb (1936) Excavations at Thermi, Lesbos, Pl. XXII, no. 35-65, no. 35-54.
30. C. W. Biegen (1950) Troy I. p. 216, no. 35-65; Fig. 360, no. 35-287.
31. S. Lloyd and 3. Mellaart, op* cit., Fig. F. 10 no. 18. 32. M. 3. Mellink, 1967, AJA 71: Pl. 770 Fig. 149 15; 1964, AJA
18: Pl. 82p Fig. 240 25. 33. Ibid. 34. H. Th. Bossert, Altanatolien. Pl. 21, no. 133. One idol is
said to be from the Manisa area. A second is reported from Dorak (personal communication from J. Mellaart).
35.0. HSckmann (1977) Art and Culture of the Cyclades, ed. 0. Thimme, P. 221,222,228.
36. J. D. Evans and, C. Renfrew (1968) Excavations at Saliaoosv p. 860 87.
37.0. Höckmann, op. Cit., p. 174.
36
to the existence of quite different burial customs and pottery
assemblages between Anatolia and the islands. Therefore only
within western Anatolia does it seem reasonable to postulate, on
grounds of similar idols, identical burial customs, and some pot- tery shapes, ie* multiple vessels, duck vase., a certain degree of
uniformity in religious or cultic beliefs. If soy then the shrine
complexes of Beycesultan Level XVII-XIII need not be a unique
occurrence but a part of a broadly similar temple architecture of western Anatolia in the Early Bronze Age. 38
No terracotta figurine is reported from Yortan. One broken human figure with incised decoration was found at Babaköy
and its absence from Yortan could be accidental. At Thermi such terracottas are said to appear not before Town III when the marble idols cease to exist.
39 But any chronological significance that
one may see in this sequence can be dismissed on the facts of the
Troy stratigraphy where the marble idols continue to be made in
Troy III and later periods.
A completely different sort of object, which is found in the tombs of the Balikesir plain but not at Yortan, is an intriguing
small terracotta in the shape of a small powder flask. Two frag-
ments were found at Babaköy (Fig. 87, no; 11). Several more are. known to come from the robbed cemeteries of the area .
40 One such object
(Fig. 88 ) carried a relief motif which could well represent the sign for "life" in Egyptian hieroglyphics. A second occurrence
of the sign is on a jug of the same provenance* 41
On the assump- tion that the object in question carries a cultic significance, the
38. The identification of these complexes as "shrines" has been rejected by M. 3. Mellink. M. 3. Mellink, 1964, AAA 68: 304. Review of Lloyd and Mellaart Beycesultan I.
39. W. Lamb (1936) Excavations at Thermi. Lesbos, p. 149,177. 40. W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 22, Abb. 9, no.. 79-81.
41.3. Mellaart (1966) Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Ape in the
Near East and Anatolia, Fig. 39, no. 10.
37
opinions vary between a symbolic horn of the bull, 42 and a symbolic
phallus of the fertility cult. 43
Its absence is noticeable in the
Beycesultan shrines. On the latter opinion Bossert once made a
remarkable attempt at identification, suggesting it could not rep-
resent the phallus of the bull but belonged to another animal
species. 44
c) Spindle Whorls
All thirty-six spindle whorls belong to the British Museum
Collection. Several are illustrated in the burials, nos. B. 11p
360 470 59 and 80 (Fig. 10 2. t 4,9 5ý 9). The shapes vary between
biconical and truncated biconical. The last six are larger and
cylindrical (Fig. 86 ). On nos. 1-30 the vertical piercing in
the centre has rounded edges on the top and base, or in some
cases a sunken central part on the top'(Fig. 840 85)..
Nos. 24 and 25 (Fig. 85 ) were for some reason cut horizontally
into two halves. The ornamentation over a very fine and hard fired
fabric is only in incision and usually limited to the upper section
of the biconical shape. As on the incised pottery, white filling
was used to bring out the delicate motifs over the smoothed or burnished surface in dark grey, red or brown/yellow colours. The
larger nos. 35 and 36 are stamped with wedge-shaped strokes and a
small stamp seal respectively (Fig. 86).
Spindle whorls are a familiar type of object in the Early
Bronze Age of Anatolia but are rather rare and crudely made in the
Aegean. The Yortan examples do not differ considerably from those
of other sites in western or central Anatolia. On the whole,, the
42. W. Orthmann, op, cit. 43. H. Th. Bossert, 1960, Or. 29: 317 ff; S. Schiek and F. Fischer,
1965., PS 17: 1599 166., Taf. 249 no. 32. 44. Ibid.
38
Beycesultan whorls tend to be more richly ornamented both on the
upper and lower parts of the biconical shape. 45 Also the truncated
version is said to appear after the EB2 period. Similarly the
differences both in shape and decoration between the Yortan and Thermi examples are rather slight, ie. Yortan nos. 11-15 (Fig. 84 )
(Troy Type 23) are absent in Town I-III where most of the Thermi
whorls are found. 46 Troy I-IV whorls come nearest to those of Yortan. 47 Thousands of them were found by Schliemann. 48 Blegen
records 429 pieces in Troy I-III. Despite their large numbers, these objects belonging to the common house utensils do not show
enough stylistic variations to be useful in the dating of unstrati-
fied finds. Thus, at Troy the incised whorls really start in lid
on Type 23 (Yortan nos. 11-15) but this is no guarantee for dating
the Yortan examples to this period; some fine decorated whorls
are found in Troy I while at Beycesultan they are actually in the
majority already, in Level XVII., and at Thermi in Town I-III which
on the pottery analysis are contemporary with the Troy I-II period. Also Type 23 continues to be found beyond Troy III levels. The
truncated shape of Yortan nos. 1-6 (Troy Type 21) is not found in
Troy I which again may or may not be chronologically significant.
45, S. Lloyd and 3. Mellaart, op. cit., p. 274,277,278. 46. W. Lamb (1936) Excavations at Thermi. Lesbos, p. 162, Fig. 47. 47. C. W. Biegen (1950) Troy I. p. 290 500 216-218; Troy II.
p. 216,218; Troy III. p. 14.9 116. 48. H. Schliemann (1880) Ilios. p. 229 ffs p. 416 ff.
39
d) Metal Objects49
Objects of copper or bronze are disappointingly scarce, and those made of such precious metals as gold are even rarer. - Even
if one were to take into account the possibility of the excavators
overlooking some of the less well preserved pieces, it is still
clear that the Yortan people did not possess metal tools and
weapons in such abundance as to bury them with their dead. Today
the whereabouts of these objects is a mystery and the golden pieces have not been seen since 1901.50 Fortunately Bittel was able to
study the bronze pieces in 1936 and his conclusions are still
valid. 51
Four of the pins are well-known types in Thermi I-IV-
and_Troy_I-II_settlements. __The
fifth pin with a bell-shaped
head has a longer history lasting into the second Millennium BC. The knife with a curving blade also has parallels in Troy II, but
the shaft hole axe and the spear-head with a mid-rib are later types of the E83 period. The spiral bracelets are simple and com-
mon objects found in all periods. Unfortunately, Gaudin's illus- trations of the burials do not show any of these objects. One
wonders whether the axe,, spear-head and the pin with bell-shaped head were found with Class B or C
. rather than Class A pottery.
It is hard to believe that by the EBI and EB2 periods metal
objects were-still scarce in these parts of western Anatolia. A
more plausible explanation may therefore be that the Yortan burials,
especially those of Class A pottery, do not belong to a particularly
49. In U. Esin's work Kuantitif Analiz Yardimiyle Anatolu'da Baslannicindan Asur Kolonileri vagina Kadar Bakir ve Tuns Madencilidi (1967), some eight metal objects are listed is
"Yortan" in the Istanbul Archaeological Museums (Ana. no. 11795-11802). This is a misleading terminology. None of these
eight pieces are known to come from Yortan but are registered as finds from the Balikesir area. I am most grateful to Miss B. Aksoy for supplying me with this information.
50. See M. Collignon, 1901, CRAI: 814 51. K. Bittel, 1939, A. f 0.13: 16 ff; D. Stronach, 1957, AS 7:
69 ff.
40
prosperous community where metal weapons'and tools would have nor-
mally been passed on from one generation to another rather than
disposed of as burial gifts. In fact, the richer tombs of the
Balikesir plain are known to have yielded greater numbers of metal 52
weapons.
52. K. Bittel, 1955, Ist. Mitteil. 6: 113 ff; S. Schiek and F. Fischer, 1965, FS 17: 157 ff; D. Stronach, op. cit.
41
CHAPTER 3A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE YORTAN POTTERY
In the absence of any stratigraphy at Yortan the only way to
identify and date the finds is by a typological and comparative
study. The former method has been used here with considerable
reserve and only secondary to the latter method. It is thought
that a disciplined analysis of the parallels with the well-known
sequences of the west Anatolian sites is a more reliable method of
research than a purely typological study. The stratified sites in
question are Troy/Hisarlik on the Troad coast, Thermi in Lesbos,
and Beycesultan near civril in the Vilayet of Denizli. The more
distant Poliochni, Karatap-Semayü'k and Aphrodisias provide supple-
mentary material. It is not for the first time that the Yortan
pottery has been the subject of such a study. It is, however, only
now that more than 90% of the finds are available as one body of
material showing all that there is to be seen from the site. The
fact that the mentioned sites are not located in the immediate
vicinity of Yortan and could actually represent quite different
cultural zoness may cause doubts as to the validity of the parallels
and the conclusions drawn from them. For example. -according to the
EB2 sequence of Troy/Hisarlik and Beycesultan, the technique of
decorating burnished pottery with matt white painting goes out of
use towards the end of the period, and at no time was this ornamen-
tation popular on these sites. But at Yortan, and probably else-
where in the Yortan Culture, it was commonly used throughout the
period with a possible extension into the next period. The pro-
posed three-fold division of the pottery iss therefore, tentative
and the lines between the classes, especially that between Class
A and B. and B and C. ought to be kept flexible allowing for a
certain amount of continuity and survival. Many of the parallels
sited are very close and often identical, and it is hard to believe
that the conclusions drawn will be proved drastically wrong by
future work.
The laborious task of giving each parallel individually and in
- 42
full detail may be justified by emphasising the importance of the
study; it is upon this comparative study that the whole under-
standing of Yortan is based, and it is here that some differences
of opinion may well be raised. Clarity in the use of the relevant
material will, it is hoped, at least serve to prevent controversy
and present the facts in full light.
CLASS A POTTERY
SHAPE I Bowls (Fig. 23p 24; Pl. III)
Together with the Berlin Collection eighteen bowls are known
to have come out of the pithos burials. Berlin Nr. Vas. 4463 is
known to exist but could not be illustrated. 1 Except for Bar. no. 64., 65 (Fig. 24 ) all the Yortan bowls belong to the carinated type
and are hand-made. Irrespective of their relatively rare occurrence
among the jars and jugs, they form a very useful group of material for comparison with the settlement sites. Some more bowls with
similar features are known from the robbed cemeteries of the North-
west; but clearly bowls were still used far less frequently as burial gifts than jars and jugs, possibly to be explained by the
nature of the funerary customs. 2
1. W. Lamb (1936) Excavations at Thermi. Lesbos, p. 86; W. Orthmannj, 1966, Ist, mitt. 16: 18s no. 65.
2. See Chapter 1s p. 17
43
Bowl no. 1.20 32 4 (Fig. 23)
These small bowls show the characteristic profile of a carinated
shoulder, incurved rim with a round lip, and a rounded base. The
shape is well-known in the E81 and EB2 of western Anatolia. Its
ancestry goes back to the Kumtepe Is3 and Ib 1.9 24 phases where besides the rolled rims, there are bowls with slightly incurving
rims. There can be little doubt that the sharp angular profile of the EB2 is a development from the rolled rim, best illustrated in
Kumtepe Ib 2 and Ib 3. The true inverted rim and angular shoulder
as seen on the Yortan bowls, is first found in the Ib 4 phase. 6
Bowl no. I is a plain vessel without any ornamentation or lug.
Bowl no. 2 has an incised cross on its rounded base, and the cari-
nated shoulder is pierced vertically in two places forming a pair
of string holes. This particular detail is not known from Troy/
Hisarlik or Thermi bowls but some identical examples are found on
a number of sites in the regions of Balikesir., Akhisar and Manisa.?
Bowl no. 3 has a lug handle set on the carination. Bowl no. 4 has
the more distinctive tubular lug in a pair and below the carination.
Two such lugs are illustrated from Troy Ib and Ic but both shards belong to a different shape of bowls, A. 25 and A. 24 respectively.
8
Similarly, this feature occurs in Poliochni Blue but on jars rather than bowls. 9
3. J. Sperling, 1976, Kumtepe in the Troad, Hesp. 45p no. 4: Fig. 9., no. 211,212.
4. J. Sperling, opo cit., Fig. 12, no. 303,304; Fig. 13p no. 407-8. 5.3. Sperling, op. cit., Fig. 13, no. 406-408; `Fig. 14, no. 501-506;
Fig. 15, no. 535-546. See also: J. Mellaart (1962) op. cit., p. 107. 6.3. Sperling, op* cit., Fig. 19., no. 611-61?. 7. See Chapter S. p. 123-1.4 8. C. W. Blepen (1950) Troy I Fig. 237, no. 31; Fig. 266, no. 7. 9. L. Bernabo-Brea (1964) Poliochni I. 2. Tav. LX-LXI.
44
Bowl no. 5.. 6 (Fig. 23)
Both are set on flaring pedestal bases with slightly oval open- ings. The former bowl has a horizontally pierced tubular lug which together with the pedestal base forms a good diagnostic feature for
some close parallels with Troy, Thermi and Beycesultan:
Troy/Hisarlik
Shape A. 13 of Troy I is an identical vessel. It is worth point-
ing out that when only a fragment of a vessel is at hand, it is
often not possible to determine whether the shard belongs to a bowl
with or without a lug, or with a base. Some of the sherds classi-
fied as Shape A. 12 may, therefore, be of this bowl, as well. The
following examples of the pedestal base are satisfactory parallels
to the Yortan bowl no. 5:
Fig. 224 no. 36.840 Troy Ib
Fig. 236 no. 29,32p 34 Troy Ib
Fig. 239 no. 23,24 Troy Ic
Fig. 262 no. 27 Troy Ic
Such bases are first noted in Troy The However, this could be a
mere coincidence and the shape could start from earlier levels. A
shorter pedestal base, without the openings, is first noted in
Kumtepe Ia 210 and later in Ib 2.11 In fact, the cylindrical
tubular lug of the Yortan bowl does appear already in Troy Is.
Examples:
Fig. 235 no. 2 Troy Is with three transverse incised
lines
Fig. 239 no. 3 Troy Ic (also no. 12 5, ?p 12)
10. J. Sperling., op. *cit. 0 Fig. 11, no. 230. 11. J. Sperling, op. cit. 2 Fig. 13, no. 413.
45
Fig. 260 no. 8 Troy Ic
Fig. 261 no. 16 Troy Ic
On the Yortan bowl the lug has five transverse grooves, similar to
the incised lines of the first examples from Troy Is where sometimes
this ornamentation takes the form of neat flutings. -ie. Fig. 261,
no. 10. Towards the end of Troy I the lug changes shape, taking. the
characteristic "ends`pinched up" form - is. Fig. 261, no. 17,18;
Fig. 244, no. 2-7.
Kumtepe once more gives an earlier appearance of the tubular
lug, in the Ib phase where the form is slightly concave but becomes
more straight in the Ic phase. 12 The contemporary Poliochni Black
and Blue also have similar lugs. 13
Theriai
No. 96., Pl. XXXV, from Town I or II makes a good parallel. The
upper part is largely missing so that the shape of the lug or handle
is not known; but the rest of the bowl on a pedestal base is not
different from Yortan or Troy/Hisarlik bowls. A second bowl, no. 6.
Pl. XXXV, from Town I is similar, though the base is rather short
without the "window� openings,, and the lug is not tubular.
Beycesultan
Pedestal bowls with the "window" openings are found in the EB2
period and are classified as Shape I. without the tubular lugs
Fig. P. 22 no. 10,13$ 15 Level XVIC
12, J. Sperlingj op. cit., p. 330. 13. L. Bernabo-Brea. 9 op. cit.. Tav. VIla; Tav. XXIV; Tav. XXV.
46
Beycesultan bowls tend to be decorated with matt white painting
on the carinated shoulder, a feature which is not seen on the Yortan
bowls but is known to occur at other sites of the Yortan Culture, 14
The absence of the tubular lug on the Beycesultan bowls could be
explained as due to the incomplete form of the vessels, especially when such lugs do occur on other forms of the carinated bowl. As
a regional and local characteristic these lugs are often ornamented
elaborately with ribbings and flutings:
Fig. P. 23 no. 3.70 9s 22 Level XVI
Bowl no. 6 (Fig. 23)
It differs from the previous bowl only in the position of the
carinated shoulder which is set rather high ups so much so that the
rim appears to be thickened. It resembles the incurving rolled rims
of Kumtepe Ib, 15 and the flat topped rims of Ic phase.
16 Other
diagnostic features are the pair of small knobs on the rim, and the
vertical piercing of both the knobs and the rim. Judging by the
finds of the Balikesir tombs, this type of knob was common on the
bowls of the Yortan Culture but is lacking at Troy/Hisarlik, Thermi,
or Beycesultan. Shape A. 6 of Troy I is the nearest to it, Fig. 234,
Fig. 253, and possibly these protrusions represent an earlier or
cruder version of the prominent horn lugs of the E82 Beycesultan.
Bowl no. 7 (Fig. 23)
This bowl differs from the rest of the carinated bowls in the
deep body shape which is formed by straight flaring sides and a
14. See Chapter 5. p. 123 15. J. Sperling, op. cit., Fig, 19, no. 610; Fig. 20, no. 647. 16. J. Sperling, op. cit., Fig. 23, no. 204.
47 .
small., well-defined flat base. In Troy/Hisarlik Shape A. 12 from I-III settlements is generally related but differs on specific details. Usually instead of the small lug handle there is a tubular- lug or loop handle.
Thermi
In Class A. Bowl no. 1 is identical and noted for being the most common type of bowl in this class (Town I-II):
P1. XXXV no. 2.64 Town I
Beycesultan
Some fragments from the earlier levels of the Early Bronze Age
period belong to the shape, no. 5 (EBI) on Mellaart's typology:
Fig. P. 14 no. 20-25 Level XIX
Fig. P. 15 no. 18-21,9 28., 29 Level XVIII, XVII
Those of Level XVI, 'Fig. P. 23, are also similar in general form,
but are elaborated with lugs or loop handles.
Bowl no. 8 (Fig. 24; Pl. III)
The profile is still carinated but not so angular as the above bowls, and the inverted rim shows a flattish lip. This more rounded
carination is a development which starts in Middle Troy I- is. Fig.
259,263, and continues into Troy N.
The rmi
The nearest examples are found in Class Bp Bowl no. 1:
P1. XXXV no. 159 Town II or III
Pl. XXXV no. 188 Town III
-48
P1. X no. 321 Town IV
P1. XXXVI no. 353 Town IV
Beycesultan
Shape 4 of the E81 levels is a satisfactory parallel showing the same deep body and rounded carination. Only the small, angular
lug of the Yortan bowl is missing:
Fig. P. 14 no. 10,11p 19 Level XIX
Fig. P. 15 no. 35,379 38 Level XVII
Thus., While Troy and Thermi evidence suggests a date later than the
beginnings of the E82 period, Beycesultan finds point to an earlier
occurrence in the South-west. This point could be interpreted as a
proof of the contemporaneity of Troy I and Beycesultan Level XIX. 17
However, in the face of the rest of the parallels it is considered
that there are insufficient grounds for changing Mellaart's revised
chronology.
Bowl No. 92 10 (Fig. 24)
These shallow and carinated bowls are provided with a horizontal
loop handle which at Troy/Hisarlik does not appear before the second
settlement:
Fig. 412 no. 16,22 Troy IIc
Fig. 375 no. 36.838 Troy IId
no. 36.854 Troy IIf
As Shape A. 16p they are much deeper than the Yortan bowls and are
often wheel-made. Yet such handles do not occur in Troy Ip and a
17,3. Sperling, op, cit., p. 358 ff; see also Chapter 4,, p. lo 6
49
later date in the E82 seems more plausible than in the beginnings
of the period.
Thermi no. 495, P1. XXXVI, from Town V is a plausible parallel
hence supporting the lower date. The shape is noted as being rare in Class C pottery. Beycesultan also lacks good parallels. The
loop handles are found in the E82 levels,. ie. Fig. P. 23, no. 4.5P
6. but they tend to be rather highly flung and quite unlike the
Yortan shape. The only evidence for an earlier date is provided by
the two special bowls from Level XVIII, Fig. P. 17, no. 4.5. but
again the similarities are rather general.
Of the three bowls from the Berlin Collection, Berlin Nr. Vas.
4463 is mentioned by both W. Lamb and W. Orthmann, 18 and represents
a very distinct shape with flaring sides, rounded base, and lugs
set on the rim. It is quoted as being very similar to bowl no. 111,
P1. XXXV, from Thermi Town 11.19 The remaining two bowls, Bar. Nr.
64s, 65 (Fig. 24 ) on the other hand are completely different from
all other Yortan bowls. The shape is deep, sack-like, and without
a defined base. The simple and upright rim has a small lug handle.
One similar bowl was found at Babaköy (Fig. 87, no. 4)s otherwise the
comparative material is completely lacking in Anatolia. In view of- their simple and rounded shape, an earlier date-in the Early Bronze
Age seems appropriate, and they may even be imports (Cyprus? ).
18. See p. 42: 19. W. Lambs, op. cit., p. 86
50
SHAPE II Small jars with tall neck and on feet
(Fig. 26-27; Pl. IV)
Together with the next shape of jars of an identical general form, these vessels constitute a numerous and highly distinctive
shape of pottery from Yortan. Except for no. 38 (Fig. 27 ) all the known examples share the same features. The neck is tall, often
cylindrical or slightly flaring. It is topped with a flanged rim. Two holes placed opposite one another and below the rim serve to
attach the lid of Type (a) (Fig. 33,34). The body is round or globu- lar and stands on three or four feet. There are always two verti-
cally pierced lugs (tab handles) on the middle of the body, and
sometimes also two small knobs in between the lugs. Jar no. 38
differs from the others in its larger size and in the everted rather than flanged form of the rim.
The jar was initially made in two separate parts, the neck and body. After joining them the additional features such as the feet
were applied before the slip coating and incision. To produce
vessels of this size, the fabric had to be finer than that used for
the larger jars and jugs; but there are some coarser pieces and
often the firing temperatures are low. No. 7 (Fig. 25 ) is an
exceptionally fine product with very thin and hard-fired walls, and
a very smooth burnished surface. Burnishing, possibly after a slip
coating, appears to be the usual way of surface treatment. The
absence of the red ware jars is notable. No. I (Fig. 25 ) and a
second jar in the Berlin Collection20 are plain vessels, the rest being ornamented by incision. The linear geometric motifs are
arranged in two ways - either horizontally parallel to the contours
of the body (no. 2- no. 17). or vertically between the neck base
and the feet (no. 18 - no. 38). Oddly enough the popularity of these small vessels at Yortan is contrasted by their almost total
20. W. Orthmannp op. cit., p. 13p Abb. 6. no. 46.
51
absence at Troy/Hisarlik and Thermi. Some related jars occur at Beycesultan.
Troy/Hisarlik
The nearest shapes are c. 28 and c. 35 which do not occur in Troy
I. The following coarse examples of c. 28 may be cited:
Fig. 401 no. 35,769 Troy IIg
Fig. 401 no. 35.515 Troy Ng
These jars are similar only in the general shape of the lugs and
body which stands on a flattened base. C. 35 on tripod feet, there-
fore, makes a better comparative case:
Fig. 403 no. 36.742 Troy IId
Fig. 403 no. 37.967 Troy lid
Fig. 403 no. 37.427 Troy IIg
Some surprisingly good examples of the Yortan shape are found in
Troy IIIa. Fig. 78p no. 34.525, no. 34.289, which are also incised
in the Yortan fashion.
Thermi
The jar is completely missing in all levels.
Beycesultan
Here,, too, the jar falls short of being identical and it can
only be related to the Yortan shape in a general way:
Fig. P. 22 no. 5 Level XVIc has pierced lugs and in-
cised chevrons, but is not
on tripod feet
Fig. P. 25 no. 24 Level XVI no. 19 of the same level
could also be rated as a
related jar
52
Fig. P. 33 no. 12 LevelXV but larger in size Fig. P. 38 no. 21 Leve1XIV ornamented with grooves which
are not found on the Yortan
jars
Fig. P. 41 no. 1., 3 Level XIV
Although these jars are undoubtedly a variation of the Yortan shape, they do not share the same details of form and ornamentation. The
rarity of Type (a) lids at this site is also worthy of note.
This partial or complete absence of close parallels from all three sites calls for an explanation. Is it because such vessels
were mainly produced for the burials and so are largely absent on
settlement sites? Or is this pot one of the characteristics of the
Yortan Culture pottery and therefore does not occur outside it? On
present evidence the answer seems to lie somewhere in between the
two alternatives. Almost complete lack of finds at Troy/Hisarlik
and Thermi, which otherwise are closely related to Yortan and can
even be understood as sites situated on the peripheries of the
Yortan Culture tend to favour the former possibility. In support
of the latter is the fact that quite similar jars are reported from
the Sardis burials21 which still belong to the Yortan Culture but
they are missing altogether in the pithos burials of the plain of Elmali where the pottery is basically different from that of the
North-west.
21. D. G. Mitten and G. Yüdrüm, 1971, HSCP 75: Fig. 4,9 9.
53
SHAPE III Larger jars with tall neck and on flattened base.
(Fig. 28-32; P1. U)
Twenty seven jars belong to this shape. 22 In basic outline they
are not different from the previous group, but some are rather large
and instead of the pierced lugs, four small loop handles are set
vertically on the upper body. Only on no. 4 (Fig. 28) are these
handles replaced by four elongated knobs. The base is flattened or.
slightly rounded but never on tripod or quadruple feet. Elsewhere
this generalisation does not seem to exist. Among the vessels of
uncertain provenance, no. 37 (Pl. XVII) is an identical large jar
but like the jars of Shape II it stands on tripod feet and has lugs
and incised decoration.
With the exception of no. 6 (Fig. 29 ) ornamentation is always
in matt white chevrons, four on each pot. Sometimes there are also
plastic knobs. No. 6 is a misfit; it is covered with incised lines,
on the neck and body, and besides the four loop handles there is a basket handle'over the horizontal mouth. The incised and white-
filled pattern on the neck is rather striking but has not been noted
from any of the excavated sites. A second but coarser jar of similar details is known to have been found in the robbed tombs of the North-
west (Fig. 91 , no. 22 ). 23
The fabric is naturally coarser than that of the smaller jars;
but'the surface finish is still fine and often burnished to a high
shine. 24 The comparative material is just as weak, with the better
material again coming from Beycesultan. As in the case of the pre-
vious group of smaller jars, similarities between the Yortan jars
and those of the three major sites exist only in the general form of
22. A further six vessels are given by Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 14.
23. This vase is now in Copenhagen.
24. See Chapter 2p p. 25.
54
the body and spout. The most recurring features of Yortan, the
small loop handles on the body and the matt white painting, are
never found elsewhere.
At Troy/Hisarlik c. 28 is the more relevant shape. Specific
examples from Level IIg have already been listed. 25 One further
broadly similar jar is no. 559, Pl. XIII, in Thermi Town II.
°Beycesultan
Fig. P. 33 no. 9.12 Level XV and possibly no. 4.6.
Light brown coloured no. 9 has incised zigzag band
or chevron motif. Fig. P. 42 no. 3 Level XIV differs from Yortan no. 4
only in the replacement of the handles with lugs.
0
Here, too, the comparative data suggest a data in the second half of the E82 period. Yet the nature of the fabric, surface treat-
ment, and the mottled colouring are all familiar technical details,
shared by bowls and jugs, and therefore the beginnings of these jars
need not be put later than other types. No. 4 (Fig. 28 ) is the
only jar that. imposes some difficulty in dating. The rim, neck and body are not different from the rest of the group, but here the
characteristic-small loop handles are substitutedr by four elongated knobs. Also the fabric is finer in texture and lighter in colour.
Originally it may have been slipped in a light red colour. Possibly
it is a later version of the shape. A similar typological distri-"
bution may also be suggested for a number of jars, no. 3 (Fig. 28
no.? (Fig. 29), Ber. -40,41,38 (Fig. 29-32), which all show, a sharper
outline marked by ä. carinated body, tall and conical neck and flattened
25. See p. 51
55
base. Bar. no. 38 (Fig. 32 ) is even provided with a raised base.
On these grounds it seems plausible to ascribe them a general date
between the middle and late EB2 while the rest with more rounded
and irregular outlook could belong to the early phase. A similar typological division is not apparent among the smaller jars of
Shape II.
In Poliochni "Yellow" similar vessels combine the characteris-
tics of these and Shape II jars; 26 in size they are like Shape III
but have pierced lugs., incised decoration, and tripod feet. Their
occurrence in the "Yellow" period is proof of the shape's continuity
to the end of the EB2, and into the E83 period.
SHAPE IV Small jars with short neck or hole-mouth
(Fig. 320 33; Pl. VI) )
The diagnostic feature is the small rounded or globular body,
topped with a short neck or hole-mouth. No. 1s 8er. 57,61 (Fig. `
32 ) have the simple flattened base; no. 2.32 4 (Fig. 322 33)
stand on tripod feet., and the rest are on short flaring pedestal
bases (Fig. 33 ). Every jar is provided with vertically pierced
lugs. No. 6 (Fig. 33 ) is a particularly fine specimen, ornamented
with fine incision and finished to a faultless lustrous black sur-
face. The shape cannot be said to typify the pottery of Yortan,
but it does represent a rather striking form and is found in good
numbers on the settlement sites. The interior of no. 4 jar (Fig.
33 ) was found to contain the remains of some red orange coloured
substance which must be the same as that in Shape II jars. 27
Depending on the form of the neck and'rim'lids (Shape V) of "a) or b)
types were used with these jars.
26, L. Bernabö-Brea (1976) Poliochni II0 Tav. CXCIX-CCI. 27. See Chapter 1sp. 17,19
56
Troy/Hisarlik
C. 24, c. 25, c. 27 (on flattened base); c. 34 (on tripod feet);
and c. 26, c. 31 (on pedestal base) are the relevant shapes. C. 34
and c. 31 are found at the end of Troy II but the rest are essentially Troy I shapes. Once more the crude and coarse nature of the material becomes rather obvious when compared with the fine products of the
Yortan potters: _
Fig. 230 no. 36.689 Troy Is
Fig. 230 no. 36.686 Troy Ib
Fig. 230 no. 35.758 Troy Ic similar to Yortan no. 1
Fig. 230 no. 35.539 Troy Ic on tripod feet
Fig. 230 no. 36.691 Troy Ic
Fig. 230 no. 36.692 Troy Ic on pedestal base
Fig. 230 no. 36.687 Troy Ib with hole-mouth
Fig. 230 no. 37.983 Troy Ic
There are also a number of body sherds in Troy I. Fig. 244, no. 23,
27; Fig. 247, no. 12, which are incised and may well belong to c. 24
and c. 31 shapes.
Thermi
This site also yields some very satisfactory parallels. Most
of the finds come from Town I-III. The hole-mouth appears in Town
IV:
Pl. VIII no. 9.10 Town I second jar is decorated
with ribbings
P1. XXXV no. 113 Town II
Pl. XXXV no. 196 Town III
Pl. VIII no. 249 Town III decorated with impressed
herring-bone pattern
P1. XXXVI no. 250 Town III
In the shape of the body, rim, and to a lesser degree pierced lugs,
57
all of these jars are indistinguishable from Yortan no. '3 and 4 (Fig.
320 33 ). Only the raised base is not found at Yortan. Instead
there is the more developed pedestal. The following examples are on tripod feet:
P1. XXXV no. 114 Town II
Pl. XIII no. 200 Town III has vertical, incised bands
Pl. IX no. 201 Town III incised
Three further examples are the hole-mouth type:
P1. XIII no. 356 Town IV incised
P1. XXXVII no. 387 Town IV biconical shape, incised
Pl. XXXVII no. 410 Town IV
Pl. XXXVII no. 411 Town IV
Beycesultan
Karatas-Semayuk has not produced any such examples. It is also
rare at Beycesultan. The known examples are ornamented in heavy
grooves:
Fig. P. 41 no. 4,, 6 Level XIV
Fig. P. 45 no. 3 Level XIIIc
The Yortan jars are ornamented sparingly in fine incision. The
more richly incised examples, no. 10-14 (Fig. 90) are from the
Balikesir tombs, Some of these jars are on tall and flaring pedes- tal bases which together with the more elaborate ornamentation and
superior surface finish could be taken to imply an E82 date later
than that of the above-mentioned Yortan jars. Such a date is con-
ceivable only for no. 1 and 2 (Fig. 32 ) of Yortan, which are made
of a uniform light grey and hard fabric without mottling. Also
no. 2 could be likened to Beycesultan jars, no. 4, ,6 of Level XIV,
Fig. P. M.
In the Cyclades the shape is known as the pyxis. Both stone
58
and clay pyxides occur in the Grotta-Pelos and Keros-Syros Cultures, 28
but any relationship between the Anatolian jars and the Cycladic
pyxides ought to be understood in the broadest sense of the word.
True, in both regions the shape contains an individual and marked
'character, it is provided with pierced lugs, and there is a lid with
string holes; but the common features cannot be taken beyond this
point, and in other details of shape and decoration there is no
resemblance whatsoever. The only Yortan vessel that can possibly
be regarded as remotely related to the Cycladic pots is the pyxis
proper, Fig. 89 ' no. 9' which with the flanged base and almost
upright sides bears some resemblance to the Grotta-Pelos variety
withýa slightly domed lid. 29
SHAPE V Lids (Fig. 33-34 ; P1. VI)
0
Lids make up an additional group of comparative material. The
basic form varies according to the shape of the rim and neck of the
pot which is enclosed by these delicate objects. At Yortan two
main types,, (a) and (b), are known and they belong to the jars of
Shape II and IV. A third, Type (c), is a coarse vessel and was
clearly for a storage jar.
Type (a)
At Yortan they are mostly in a convex or dome shape. A central,
knob on the outside serves as the lid-handle. Two holes on either
side of the knob correspond to those of the jar below the rim, and
also to the pierced lugs on the middle body. The fabric, surface
treatment, and incised decoration are the same as those of the jars.
28. J. E. Coleman (1977) Art and Culture of the Cyclades, ed. J. Thimme, p. 110 ffs P1.388-391,395,396,392.
29. Ibid.
59
"Kokten's finds at Babaköy Burial no. 430 were enough to prove that at least some of these lids belong to the jars of Shape II.
Now Gaudin's illustrations, (Fig. 1-11 ) Pithos no. B. 15,450 479 48,582 622 06, are available for'further confirmation of this fact. Some of the lids, especially those with a`flat rather than a convex profile might also have been used with the pyxis which is
not represented in the Yortan finds but is known from other ceme- teries of the North-west, Fig. 89 2 no. 7-9.
Jars of Shape III are also suitably' farmed for this type of
coverage but somehow none of the Yortan examples has the necessary
string holes under the flanged rim.
Both convex and flat lids are found throughout Troy/Hisarlik as Shape D. 14 and D. 15. Several were found at Kumtepe: 31
Fig. 267 no. 33.195
Fig. 267 no. 36.678
P1.78 no. 724
Pl. 78 no. 826
Troy I
Troy I
Kumtepe Ic 1
Kumtepe Ic 2
The Thermi lids classified as Type Ig and Ii belong to the con-
vex shape and are found in Town I--! II. Type Ih is flat and very
common in Town I-III. Type Ifs which is also convex but much smaller in size, appears in Town III-IV. In the absence of the jars, Shape
II, one must assume that all these lids were for the pyxis and hole-
mouth jar of Shape IV ! both of which occur in good numbers on this
site and Troy/Hisarlik. At Beycesultan only three such lids were found. The first two, Fig. P. 20, no. 5 and 72 come from Level XVIII,
and the third., Fig. P. 33.. no. 7,, from Level XV.
30, I. K. Kökten, 1949, Bell. 13: Lev. XCIV. 31. J. Sperling, op. cit.
60
Type (b) (Fig. 34)
These lids have a flat top crowned with five knobs, four of which are flattish and obliquely pierced. The fifth is a central
and conical one. The general shape of the lid is cylindrical so that the straight sides fit over the short collar neck of the jars Shape IV. Troy Shape. D. 11 is an exact parallel in the Early sub-
32 period of Troy I. One fragment was found in Kumtepe Ic 2 phase.
Fig. 231 no. 33,162 Troy Ic
Fig. 23 no. 825 Kumtepe Ic 2
Thermi
Lids Type XIV a and b are in this shape.
P1. XVII no. 107 Town I or II
Pl. XXXV no. 196 Town III
Type (c) (Fig. 34)
The only example from Yortan is a coarse and irregularly shaped
vessel without any ornamentation. Shape D. 1 from Troy/Hisarlik is
an exact parallel and occurs from Troy I onwards. The later exam-
ples are wheel-made. At Thermi it is Type XIIId (P1. XL) and is
found in Town I and III-IV.
Obviously the purpose of these objects was to provide coverage
for the jars with suitable apertures; but as handmade pottery, the
lid and the pot never show a tight fit, and one may wonder whether
this was a symbolic rather than a practical arrangement. Since the
holes are positioned opposite one another, the lid would have been
tied down on either side, perhaps with some perishable string. With
32. J. Sperling, op, cit.
61
Type (b) lids, there is no hole under the jar rim, and it must have
just fitted over the short and upright neck, unless of course the
vertically pierced lugs on the jar body and those on top of the lid
also had the function of securing the two pieces into one unit. Perhaps in this way the "secret" contents of these pots were "safely"
enclosed as part of the rite, and then deposited in the tombs with the dead. 33
SHAPE VI Juglets (Fig. 35 ; P1. VII )
Some thirteen pieces are illustrated for this miniature and very
striking jug shape. 34 With the exception of no. 1 (Fig. 35 ) the
height is never above 7,5 cm. The short neck is round, or more
rarely angular, and extends to form an obliquely cut, or cutaway type spout, sometimes with a notched tip. The single loop handle
can be oval or angular in section. The pouring channel is no more than a narrow hole leading into a solid body with little space to
hold any liquid.
The miniature size could only be attained by using a fabric much finer than that for the larger jugs. The surface is always highly
burnished and ornamented with incised and white filled patterns.
No. 11 and 12 are particularly fine products.
One crude juglet from the Third City is illustrated by Schliemann
in Ilios no. 44.35 Otherwise it is not represented at Troy/Hisarlik
or Beycesultan. However, one fair example is known from Kara Agac
Tepe36 and there are some surprisingly good parallels at Thermi:
33, See Chapter 1s p. 17 34. Thirteen more juglets are given by W. Orthmann, op. cit.. p. 10. 35. H. Schliemann (1880) Ilios. 36. R. Demangel (1926) Le Tumulus dit de Protesilas, p. 180 Fig. 17.
62
P1. XII, no. '63 Town I classified as Miniature vase XLIII Type 38
P1. XII no. 556 Town I
P1. XII no. 126 Town II
P1. XXXV no. 140 Town II
P1. IX no. 506 Town V Class CS jug 11 - incomplete
The juglet is best represented in the Class A pottery of the site. Jug no. 11 of Class C could also be this shape, which is in line
with the argument that these vessels are really miniatures of the
larger jugs,, Shape VII-X, which start in the beginnings of the E82
period, if not earlier, and last to the and of the period.
A rare appearance on the settlement sites once again provokes the question of the purpose of these jugs. It is most unlikely that
they could be considered as small containers of a rare or valuable liquid. The globular or pear-shaped body is simply not made to hold
any liquid at all. As miniatures of the larger jugs they were
perhaps children's "toys". Since some are found in the habitation
levels of Thermi the living children might have had them as well.
The lack of finds at Beycesultan and Karatap-Semayük shows clearly that this is another characteristic of the Yortan pottery not found
in the South-west. *
SHAPE VII Small jugs with obliquely cut spout" (Fig. 36p 37;
PI. -VII)
The largest jug, no. 6 (Fig. 36 ) is not higher than 12.5 cm.
Otherwise these and the next shape of jugs share the same features.
A round or globular. body stands on a flattened base, and only in
two cases are, tripod feet provided. The short neck is broad and flaring, and is cut obliquely to form a modest beak spout. 'A
slightly everted rim always has a round rimlip. Each jug is pro-
vided with a loop handle which is placed between the upper part of
63
the body and the lowest point of the rim at the base of the neck. Jug no. 6 and no. 14 (Fig. 6,37) have a second, smaller loop handle
on the front of the body. More unusual is no. 7 (Fig. 36 )' with three such extra handles. Obviously the hallmark of these jugs is
the form of the spout and the single loop handle. Only one jug,
no. I (Fig. 36 ) does not comply with this rule, and instead it has
a horizontal spout. Several more jugs with this type of spout are illustrated from the Berlin Collection37 but they seem to be later
in date, possibly belonging to Class 8 or C pottery of Yortan.
The fabric varies between fine and coarse. The surface is
smooth and often. burnished after slipping. Mottling is very common. Black and grey. colours dominate and out of a total of twenty two
jugs only three could be singled out as red ware, 38
no. 20s 21s
Bar. 8 (Fig. 37 ). Incision is never applied to this or the next
shape. When ornamented it is either with simple plastic features
or, more commonly, with matt white painting. No. 19 (Fig. 37 ) is
a particularly unsuccessful product; the overall shaping is irre-
gular, the walls are rather thick, and due to the mottling, and
possibly also to soil conditions, the chevrons are hardly visible.
In some parts they actually appear in a tone of grey and darker
than the background colour. At the other extreme no. 7 (Fig. 36 )
is a very fine piece, unfortunately incompletely preserved. A
highly burnished surface is in two colours, black above the handles
and a mild tone of light brown on the lower body. This gives the
impression of the ability to control oxidisation and reducing the
atmosphere of the kiln. However, such vessels are very rare at Yortan and need not be any more than accidental products.
39
37, W. Orthmann, op. cit., Abb. 1$ no. 12 22 3. 38. It is possible that some of the twenty six vessels listed by
Orthmann, op. cit., p. 4. as jugs with obliquely cut spouts (Schnabelkannenp Gruppe 2) are also in red ware.
39. See also Chapter 2., p. 27
64
Troy/Hisarlik
Shape 8.13,8.14, and to a lesser degree 8.17, are beak-spouted
jugs. Smaller examples are rare, and all the finds show a fabric
coarser than that of Yortan. Shape B. 13 and B. 14 belong to Troy I. Shape 8,17 more or less takes the form into Troy II:
Fig. 228 no. 35.540 Troy Ic
Fig. 228 no. 35.541 Troy Ic
Thermi
Jug 1., 5, j 6 of Class A and jug 1.20 6 of Class C' are' fairly
good parallels:
Pl. XII no. 71 Town 'I
P1. X no. 560 Town I
Pl. VIII no. 161 Town II
Pl. XII no. 164 Town II or III
Pl. XII no. 235 Town III
P1. VIII no. 253 Town III impressed chevrons
P1. XII no. 570 Town IV
Beycesultan
One such beak spouted jug makes an early appearance in Level
XIX. But the shape becomes common in the E82 Levels (Shape no. 8):
Fig. P. 14 no. 31,36 Level XIX
Fig. P. 22 no. 3., 12 Level XVIc
Fig. P. 25 no. 5.6p 7p 8p 13 Level XVI
Fig. P. 38 no. 13 Level XIV
Fig. P. 39 no. 2,3 Level XIV
Some of these jugs are in a neck"and spout'form which is slimmer
than that of the Yortan jugs. This slight deviation in broadly the
same type of jug can be observed also on jugs of the Elmali plain
65
and may be attributed to regional variations.
Further comments on the peculiarities of the shape are outlined under the next Shape.
SHAPE VIII Larger jugs with obliquely cut spout (Fig. 38-44;
P1. VIII )
These larger vessels make better comparative material than the
smaller jugs which were probably also play objects for the younger
population of the site. Altogether some eighty five jugs are known
to exist, which makes the shape the most numerously represented one in'the pottery of Yortan. 40
Ornamentation and other details are the safe as those noted for the previous Shape VII. Being larger
and thicker pats, the fabric is naturally coarser but few jugs are
very coarse. 41 The formation of the body and neck is rarely perfect,
with much asymmetry all round. The surface colour is mottled in
tones of black, grey and brown. Nevertheless these jugs often make
a very attractive pottery and it seems that this achievement is
mainly due to the application of a slip coating and subsequent bur-
nishing. In this way the coarse nature of the fabric could be con-
cealed and a lively outlook gained. Moreover, since all the vessels
are hand-made the irregularities in shaping are favourably balanced
by a feeling of individuality that is embodied in each pot.
Characteristically, the globular body sits on a small base,
tilted forward. The single loop handle is usually oval in section, but sometimes it acquires a sharper outline becoming a little angular.
This metallic feature does not, however, appear on any other part of
40, Here only twenty seven jugs could be illustrated. The rest are in the Berlin Collection. See note 37.
41. Petrological analysis of jug no. 25, Fig. 44., see Chapter 2. p. 27.
66
the pot. Several attractive jugs, no. 6.112 12p 15 (Fig. 39,40,41)
share a' gently ;; rounded bulge on the lower part of the neck and the spout is cut steeply in a true beak-like formation. All these
details contribute to the naturalistic and lively, rather than dull
and metallic, impression of the shape. To illustrate the point
with one example, Fig. 92 ' no. 26 9 is a jug with a better fabric
and symmetry and therefore it is technically a superior product.
Yet in its dull, grey colour and rigid outline, it does not make
a beautiful or attractive vessel.
Jug. no. . 15 (Fig. 41) may be pointed out as the best Yortan
product of the shape. Jug no. 26 (Fig. 44 ) falls slightly out of
the general shape. It is a rather squat vessel, with a broad neck
and spout which give it a "Kusura cup" type outlook. Dark, brownish
colour and very prominent knobs all add to the "foreign" appearance
of the vessel.
Troy/Hisarlsk
8.13 is an identical shape and found throughout Troy I. None
of the examples is ornamented with matt white chevrons:
Fig. 228 no. 36.735 Troy Ia
Fig. 228 no. 36.843 Troy Ia
Fig. 228 no. 36.760 Troy Ib
Fig. 228 no. 36.641 Troy Ic
Fig. 228 no. 37.1137 Troy Ic
The shape continues into Troy II and III as 8.17, but then the spout
is less beak-like and more horizontal:
Fig. 388 no. 35.575 Troy Ng
Fig. 388 no. 35.513 Troy IIg
Fig. 388 no. 35.429 Troy Ng
Fig. 70 no. 34.278 Troy III
67
Kumtepe, ýca. 5 km north-west of Troy/Hisarlik mound also has
these jugs in the Ic 1 phase, thus confirming a very early E82
appearance of the shape in the Troad. 42
P1.78 no. 721,, 722 Kumtepe Ic 1
P1.78 no. 816,8170 818 Kumtepe Ic 2
But several jugs from Kara A6aq Tape are the closest Troad finds
to the Yortan group. 43 In every detail of the shape - oblique cut-
ting of the spout, single loop handle, overall proportions of the
shape, and the surface treatment - they are almost indistinguishable
from those of Yortan.
Thermi
P1. XXXV no. 18 Town I
Pl. VIII no. 70 Town I
Pl. XII no. 233 Town III
Pl. XII no. 288 Town III three knobs on the upper body
Pl. XXXVI no. 327 Town IV brown ware
Pl. XXXVI no. 328 Town IV grey., brown ware
Pl. XXXYII no. 413 Town IV
Pl. XXXVII no. 419 Town IV with a rather broad neck
and spout
Beycesultan
Fig. P. 25 no. 1.22 3s 12 Level XVI but more like the
"Kusura Cup"
Fig. P. 31 no. 4.9 Level XV on tripod feet
Fig. P. 32 no. 1.2p 3 Level XV
Fig. P. 40 no. 3.42 5o 6 Level XIV
42. J. Sperling, 1976, Kumtepe in the Troad, .. H,, ýeesýp,.
45, no. 4. 43, R. Demangel (1926) Le Tumulus dit de Protbsilas, p. 390 Fig.
46; p. 550 Fig. 69; p. 579 Fig. 72.
68
Several minor variations may be pointed out; no. 2 and 3 from
Level XVI are more in the "Kusura cup" form which is not really
represented at Yortan; no. 12 of the same level is a better parallel with a twisted handle, which on Yortan jugs no. 13 (Fig. 40 ) is
single. In addition to the Beycesultan material some finds from
Karatas-Semayuk are worthy of mention:
Pl. 81 Fig. 23 AJA 68-(1964) red slipped P1.60 Fig, 6 AJA 69 (1965) black, white painted Pl. 83 Fig. 48 AN 71 (1967) dark., plain P1.84 Fig. 34 AJA 72 (1968) red polished P1.73 Fig. 9 AN 73 (1969) red polished, white painted
These are some of the finds that come close to resembling the Yortan
shape. But a more popular jug of this site has a narrower neck and
more everted rim, already noted among the smaller jugs (Shape VII)
of Beycesultan. 44 Two further aspects of the Karata? pottery are interesting; despite the less satisfactory parallels to the pottery
of Yortan, the matt white painting, which has so far been rare out-
side Yortan in the EB2 period, is in full use here on black and red burnished wares; secondly, the characteristic pottery of the plain is red burnished, and matt white painting is not restricted to chev-
rons or zigzag lines, but takes other forms such as parallel lines
or hanging spirals. On the whole it is a thicker, sturdier pottery than that of Yortan and often a very broad loop handle has the white decoration as well.
45
Besides their large numbers at Yortan these jugs, small or large,
are also conspicuous in having a very broad geographical distribution.
and are certainly the best known North-west shape outside the area.
44, For some examples of the form see M. J. Mellink, 1964, AN 68: P1.80p Fig. 160 17p Pl. 81v Fig. 22,23; 1966, AN 70: Pl. 590 Fig. 15.9 17p 19; 1968, AJA 72: P1.84p Fig. 34.
45. Ibid.
69
Beyond the'Troad at Poliochni on Lemnos it starts in the "Black"
period with a modest beak-spout but a rather large loop handle. 46
It continues into the "Green" period. Further west it is found at Dikili Tai in the E82 levels, 47
and in Bulgaria from Ezero A (Horizon XIII) onward.
48 However, so far nothing comparable has
come to light in the Cyclades or mainland Greece. Along the Anato-
lian coast it is probably one of the vessels that make up the so-
called "Troy I horizon" at Emporia-on Chios. 49 At MUsgebi a few
unstratified jugs belong to the South-west variety of the shape. so
Towards the South-east the "Kusura, cup" and some more Yortan-like
versions are well spread in the Burdur-Isparta region, is, Senirce, 51
Mancarli HUyük, Yassi Huyük52. and make a surprising extension into
the Eskisehir-Ankara region. 53
The frequent appearance of the jug on the three main sites is
very important in helping to secure a chronological identity for
the shape and for the Yortan Class A pottery in general. Clearly,
it was in use from the earliest levels of the E82 period in the
Troad, and possibly earlier at Beycesultan. But it does not seem
to have evolved from an earlier shape at either of these sites. In
view of its very substantial presence at Yortan it iss I believe,
conceivable to suggest that the jug is a product of the Yortan Cul-
ture with the beginnings being much earlier than the EB2 period.
46, L. Bernabä-Brea (1964) Poliochni I. 2, Black - Tav. I f, g, Tav. III k; Blue - Tav. XLII-XLV; Green - Tav. CXXII.
47.3. Deshayes, 1972, Arch. 25, no. 3: 199. 48. C. I. Georgiev, N. 3. Merpert and G. D. Dimitrov (1979)
Ezero, Abb. 174. 49. S. Hood (1965) Atti del VI Conpresso Internazionale delle
Scienze Preistoriche a Protostoriche, Sezione III, p. 226. 50. E. Vermeule, 1964, Arch, 17, no. 4: 247,248. 51. H. A. Ormerod, 1911-12, BSA 18: Pl. V, no. 3,4; P1. VI, no.
4,6; Pl. VII, no. 6,9,10. 52.3. Mellaart, 1954, ASA 4: 230, no. 352,357-359; 232, no. 361,
362. 53. For a general account see 3. Mellaart, 1971, CAH Vol. Is part 2:
371 ff, 383 ff. Also S. Lloyd and 3. Mellaart (1962) Be ce- sultan I. p. 183.
70
Its development could have been in the E91. Poliochni ands. to some extent, Ezero finds are in support of an early date.
SHAPE IX Small jugs with cutaway spout (Fig. 45-47 ; Pl. IX
This and the next Shape, which are identical except for size, also make up a numerous and distinctly west Anatolian group of
vessels. 54 The smallest jug, no. I (Fig. 45 ) is ca. 10 cm and the
largest, no. 1 (Fig. 46 ) ca. 17 cm high. Shape X contains jugs
which are never under 20 cm. The most characteristic of the shape is the cutaway form of the neck and spout. Jugs no. 7 (Fig. 45) and
and no. 8,9, (Fig, 46) stand on tripod feet. The rest are on a
rounded or flattened type of base. As usual the fabric varies bet-
ween fine and coarse, and contains a micacious body. The burnished
or smoothed surface has all the signs of lack of even firing condi- tions. Few vessels-such as no. 3 (Fig. 45) or no. 16 (Fig. 47) are fired to one uniform colour; but the shaping is very competent and
always treated to a smooth finish. Besides slipping and/or burnish-
ing, the decoration takes the form of simple plastic features or
matt white painting. Jug no. 8 (Fig. 46) is striking in its three
pairs of very prominent, almost horn-like knobs. Jug no. 9. (Fig.
46 ) has three horizontal bars across the painted chevrons. The
"pendant-like" feature occurs on jug no. 11 (Fig. 46 ) and no. 13 (Fig. 46). A more unusually decorated vessel is no. 2 (Fig. 45)
which is covered with flutings on the upper body. This type of
plastic "ornamentation" is very rare at Yortan and the Yortan Culture
in general.
Among the white painted jugs no. 14 (Fig. 47) is the most
)
54, Twelve more jugs with cutaway spouts belong to the Berlin Collection. See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 62 Schnabelkannen Gruppe 4.
71
elaborately decorated one; it has three quadruple chevrons, three
plastic crescents, and two large cross-hatched lozenges. In con- trast to this and the above-mentioned jugs, no. 11 (Fig. 46 ) shows
every sign of a failed product; the shape is irregularly formed,
the colouring is in a state of confusion, and the faint chevrons
appear as if allowed to trickle downs rather than drawn on, the
surface,
For comparative material Thermi is the only site with such small jugs and they are therefore not treated separately from the next
Shape.
SHAPE X Larger jugs with cutaway spout (Fig. 48-64;
Pl. X)
Thus far the presentation of individual 'jugs within their shape'
groups has been based mainly on the ornamentation and to some extent
on the colour of the ware. Here the method is abandoned for once
and the thirty four vessels are arranged according to the peculiari-
ties of their most typical feature, the spout. In the making of these jugs, the two main parts, the neck and body, would normally
be built separately and joined before the drying of the clay. The
formation of the spout takes several cuttings; first a part of the
upper section of the cylindrically set-up neck is sliced off in an
oblique stroke producing a slanting or rising spout. For jugs of
Shape VII-VIII the-process-of°shaping the spout ends-at this stage; but
here more of the neck has to be removed in a second cutting, this
time with a near-vertical stroke towards the neck base. The addition
of the loop handle and other extra features such as the feet or
knobs has to be carried out before the application of the slip coat-
ing which at Yortan was apparently done with a cloth or brush.
According to the degree of the cuttings the jugs can be divided
into six groups which may or may not be typologically significant.
72
The first four jugs, no. 1-4 (Fig. 48p 49 ) have a relatively
short spout and the angle of the cutaway section (from the horizontal
plane) is less than 450. This gives the spout a beak-like appear- ance. In the second group, no. 5-9 (Fig. 50-52 ) the height'
of the spout is still short but the cutaway part is deep and makes a curving profile. The third and fourth groups, no. 10-19 (Fig.
52-57 ) and no. 20-25 (Fig. 58-60 ) have taller spouts which on the former group are large and deep and on the latter broad
and shallow. A further five jugs, no. 26-31 (Fig. 60-62 )'
classified as the fifth group, resemble some of the previous types
except that here the top part of the spout is either left horizontal
or cut obliquely in the opposite direction towards the front of the
vessel. No. 31 has a rare form. of the twisted handle; it is actu-
ally made of a number of thin and rounded strips of clay which are
pressed and stuck together, perhaps imitating a basket handle of
rushes or reeds. No. 29 jug is. exceptional in its sharply everted
rim with a flat top. This metallic outlook is increased by the tri-
angular section of the handle and a very deep and narrow pouring
channel.
The remaining three jugs, no. 32-34 (Fig. 630 64 ) differ from
the rest in the body and spout shapes. Whereas the above jugs, and the Yortan jugs in general, are round or globular, these three are
carinated and very metallic. The loop handle is flat, strap-like
and joins the rim at a point quite high up from the neck base.
In ornamentation the white chevrons over a dark burnished surface
again predominate. They are drawn in a characteristically rigid
style of three, four or five groups of parallel lines. Only on no. 22 (Fig. 58 ) is a more flexible hand in evidence, drawing in steady
and sweeping curves towards the base. Jug no. 29 is also outstanding
in ornamentation; besides the quadruple chevrons and moulded double
chevrons, there are two running double lozenges, one on either side
of the handle, and one vertical zigzag line on the front body. In
plastic one sees the usual knobs, bars or crescents. Mostly they
are placed on the upper body and/or on either side of the cutaway
73
spout. Sometimes the crescents are long and sweeping, no. 26 (Fig.
60 ) or rather short and low in relief, no. I (Fig. 48 ). On one
very large jug, no. 8 (Fig. 51 ) each crescent is partitioned in
the middle, by a perpendicular line. This jug also has a lively
imitation of a necklace and a pair of earrings.
Troy/Hisarlik
The material is disappointingly small. Shape 8.15 has a kind
of cutaway spout but the body is more like the jugs of Shape X:
Fig. 227 no. 35,649 Troy Ia
Fig. '247 no. 15 Troy If
Fig. 412 no. 29,34 Troy IIo
The last examples are found in the ledge. Oddly enough they are included under Shape 8.17 which is a jug, with obliquely cut spout.
Thermi
P1. XII no. 14 Town I three knobs and impressed
chevrons
P1. XII no. 15 Town I three knobs
P1. VIII no. 69 Town I
Pl. XII no. 116 Town II three knobs and impressed
chevrons Pl. XXXV no. 117 Town II
P1. VIII no. 163 Town II
or III
Pl. XXXV no. 203 Town III impressed chevrons
Pl. XXXV no. 204 Town III
Pl., XXXV no. 233 Town III
P1. XXXVI no. 234 Town III incised on the base of neck
P1. XXXVI no. 252 Town III
Pl. XXXVI no. 287 Town III
Thermi yields some of the closest parallels, especially for the plain
74
vessels, -thus strengthening one's impression that Lesbos was part
of the cultures of the opposite mainland coast.
Beycesultan .
Shape no. 17 of EB1 and no. 10 of E82 are jugs with the cutaway
spout:
Fig. P. 14 no. 35 Level XIX
Unfortunately, this is a lonely find of the E81 levels and might be
considered an intrusion from the upper levels.
Fig. P. 22 no. 4 Level XVIc
Fig. P. 25 no. 11 Level XVI
Fig. P. 31 no, 5 Level XV on tripod feet., three
knobs
Fig. P. 39 no. 10 50 Level XIV no. Sand 13 are, on 11., 13 tripod feet
Fig. P. 40 no. 1 Level XIV double twisted handle
Fig. P. 45 no. 4 Level XIIIc
Jug no. 1 of Level XIV is a rather squat vessel with a very broad
neck and spout. No. 5 of the same level is quite similar to the
third group of the Yortan jugs, is. no. 1019, and can even be con-
sidered an import into Beycesultan.
Several fragments of body shards with plastic features and matt
white painting are also very important additional material. One
fragment, no. 11s Level XIV, has already been cited. Three more
came from Level XVIc, no. 2s 8s 11, and one need not doubt that
these sherds belong to such Yortan jugs as no. 10,19# 21p 23 or 31.
Thus., while the pottery of the Troad is almost without the shape, Thermi I-III and Beycesultan E82 levels (up to Level XIV) provide
some excellent parallels and therefore the shape should not be
75
considered as chronologically different from the jugs with obliquely
cut spout. A more precise definition of the lower and upper limits
must, however, remain tentative. Bearing in mind all the technical
details and stratigraphic occurrence of these and other jugs, one
can state that here, too, the basic shape probably starts back in
the EB1 period, 'and on grounds of typological observations - taller,
more beak-like spout, sharper rim formation, etc. - some of the
jugs, ie. the fifth group, could be thought to date from the end of the EB2 period.
Outside Anatolia the shape is outstanding in its almost non-
existent distribution. Even at Poliochni there is nothing compar-
able, thus confirming a limited distribution towards'the Troad coast.
In Early Bronze Age Crete a beak-spouted jug is thought to be a
derived form. 55 It seems correct to look beyond the island for the
ancestor of the vessel which does not occur in the preceding Neo-
lithic material, and the fourth group of the Yortan jugs is similar in spout formation. Yet the rest of the shape and ornamentation are
quite unlike the Yortan examples and it is hard to see a direct link
between them.
SHAPE XI Jugs with flanged rim and side-spout (rig. 65;
Pl. XI)
Six small jugs with a single or double side-spout form a'separate
shape which also exists in much larger vessels of the next group,
Shape XII. The side-spout is certainly an important feature but it
cannot be considered diagnostic. Such spouts are found on'a number
55, K. Branigan (1970) The Foundations of Palatial Crete, p. 190 ff; P. W. Warren (1973) Bronze Age Migrations in the Aegean, ed. R. A. Crossland and A. Birchall, p. 41 ff; J. L. Caskey, '1971, CAH, Vol. Is part 2, p. 799 ff.
76
of quite different shapes, and therefore the present classification
rests on the, form of the neck and spout. The latter part is again in a slanting profile but unlike Shape VII-VIII jugs here the rim is considerably everted and forms a broad, inward-sloping spout. The fabric is moderately fine and is fired a little harder than the
usual Class A pottery. The burnishing over the lighter tone of grey is low. In addition to the side-spout some of the jugs have plastic knobs and crescents.
The parallel material from the three main sites is most inade-
quate. There is simply nothing at Troy/Hisarlik and Beycesultan,,
while on Lesbos only one jug, P1. X. no. 141, from Town II can pos-
sibly be held out as relevant. However, the situation is to some
extent improved by one find at Kara Agar Tepee Fig. 72.56 It is a highly burnished jug and compares with the Yortan example no. 5 (Fig. 65 ) in almost every detail showing that the lack of finds at Troy/Hisarlik or elsewhere could be superficial. Further comments
may be reserved until the next Shape.
SHAPE XII Larger jugs with flanged rim (Fig. 66-69; Pl. XI) )
The overall form of these eight jugs is similar to that of the
previous smaller shape. Compared with other jugs of the site, here
the body tends to be more rounded and the single loop handle is
usually angular in section. The neck is short, except for no. 3 (Fig. 67 ) and in outline the flanged rim is oval and not circular. Only one jug, no. 7 (Fig. 69 )' is in red ware. The fabric is not
coarse. It is always fired hard which makes these jugs less easily
breakable than other Class A vessels. There is slip coating and good burnishing.
56. R. Oemangel, op. cit., p. 57.
77
No. 3 jug is a very striking vessel. A tall, slender neck, very- thin and triangular loop handle, and a large squat body, coupled
with a very lustrous dark surface, combine to produce the most suc-
cessful product of the Class A pottery.
The ornamentation is the same as on other jugs. There are the
matt white painted chevrons, plastic crescents, or bars. Two jugs,
no. 2 (Fig. 66 ) and no. 3 (Fig. 67 )' have the "pendant" motif
which on the latter is particularly detailed, showing two round "beads" suspended froma "string line" knotted at the back.
Beycesultan has no comparable shape, but some good parallels can be sought out of the pottery of Troy I and Thermi I-III. "
Troy/Hisarllk
It is Shape 8.16 and occurs only in the Early and Middle sub-
periods:
Fig. 236 no. 5.14 Troy lb
Fig. 240 no. 6.7 Troy Ic
These fragments of spouts and handles clearly belong to this Yortan
shape. In the publication of the above Troy/Hisarlik material, the
missing lower parts were restored according to the Thermi finds.
Therms
Pl. XII no. 12 Town I grooved chevron motif Pl. XII no. 99 Town I
or II
Pl. XII no. 115 Town II on tripod feet, ribbed deco-
ration., and knobs
P1. VIII no. 139 Town II with a side handle
Pl. X no. 141 Town II with a double side-spout Pl. XII no. 251 Town III knobs on the body
78
The Thermi jugs tend to have a form of spout which is bent backwards.
This feature has been noted on other Yortan jugs but does not occur
on this shape. 57
Otherwise the parallel material is admirably alike Yortan, confirming the shape's beginnings in the Troy I period. On the other hand, the lack of finds in Troy II or Thermi IV-V does
not'necessarily mean a short lifespan in the E62 period. On the
contrary, there are such technicalities as the harder fired fabric,
lighter colours of the smaller Shape XI, or high competence in
shaping that may well be understood as indicators of a prolonged
extension-into the later phases of the EB2. Furthermore, the side-
spout of one of the "teapots". Fig. 79 , no. 19, looks almost
exactly like the spouts of these jugs. This "teapot" (Class B pot- tery) is quite certain to date from the second half of the E82
period.
SHAPE XIII Tankards (Fig. 70 ; Pl. XII )
All three vessels are quite similar to each other. The body is
globular or pear-shaped and the short neck flares open to the hori-
zontal mouth. There are two flat loop handles, one on either side
of the neck. The rounded base is only slightly flattened.
Neither Thermi nor Troy/Hisarlik has such vessels. On the other hand, at Beycesultan one or two finds suggest an early date in the
EB1 period, or even earlier. Fig. P. 19, no. 2. in Level XVIIc is
practically identical to Yortan no. 2 in shape but is different in
its rather fine red coloured fabric. A second possible example is
a small jar, Fig. P. 129 no. 4. from Level XX.
These possible early occurrences at Beycesultan are, however,
57, See Shape VIII, p. 66..
79
offset by the presence of three almost identical tankards in Poli-
ochni Red58 which cannot be dated so early as the Eß1 period of
western Anatolia.
A certain degree of similarity between these tankards and the
well-known depas of Troy II and III is obvious; both shapes share the same upright posture, the mouthopening is horizontal over a flaring neck, and the two loop handles are placed vertically, oppo-
site one another. However, other particulars of the shape and fabric are considerably different and it seems incorrect to con-
sider these tankards as a form of the late EB2 depas. Firstly, the
Yortan pots are hand-made and therefore tend to be more irregular
and curvilinear than the wheel-made depas. Secondly, the handles
are flat in section and not round which is always the case of the
depas shape, A. 39, A. 43 of Troy/Hisarlik. Thirdly, there is the
nature of the fabric, which in no. 1 and no. 2 of Yortan is'rather
coarse anddark grey and quite the opposite of the fine and light,
coloured depas. In'this last respect no. 3 tankard of Yortan poses
some difficulties; its fabric is indeed very fine and light brown
in colour; the burnished surface is coated with a dark brown slip
which has actually been compared with the brown wares of Thermi
Class C pottery (Town IV-V). 59 These considerations together with the Poliochni Red tankards admittedly make it hard to put the shape into the category of the earliest Yortan pottery; but a link with the depas seems quite unwarranted.
58. L. Bernabo-Breas op. cit., Tav. CXLIII ip CXLVI dq f. 59. R. W. Hutchnison., 1935, Iraq 2: 214.
80
SHAPE XIV Bird-shaped vessels (Fig. 71-73 ; P1. XII )
Here a number of vessels of a unique shape introduce a pleasant break into the monotonous recurrence of the innumerable jars and jugs of ordinary forms. All nine carry the identity of depicting
a bird in a varying degree of realism. No. 1 and no. 2 (Fig. 71 )
are rather stylised and only vaguely recall such modelling. The
other seven vessels are more or less identical in having a horizon-
tally mounted standing body position on three feet, and it is really this characteristic and to some extent the ornamental details that
give them the appearance of a bird in a standing position. The tail
is indicated in a pointed knob, or a flat and broad projection. At
the other end the neck and head are not modelled in any form of
naturalism. Instead there is a functional spout of the cutaway type. No. 4 (Fig. 72 ) is the largest and with its broad, dumpy
body may be representing a duck. The fluted decoration is purely
ornamental. No. 5 has a long, slender body and upon a highly bur-
nished surface the "wings" are roughly drawn in several grooved lines. No. 8 (Fig. 73 ) is the finest specimen of the shape, but
does not definitely come from Yortan. 60 The bright red colour slip
and the plastic rectangle on either side of the body have no parallel in the Yortan pottery. Two cute miniatures, no. 6.7 (Fig. 73 )0
are decorated with incision which again may represent a stylised depiction of such details as wings and feathers.
In contrast to its interesting and often humerous qualities, the bird vase, or "askos", does not form a common pottery shape, and wherever found the numbers are limited to a few. Nothing comparable is known in the EB1 or EB2 levels of Beycesultan or Thermi. Troy/
Hlsarlik material is a little more helpful. There are several spout fragments in Troy Is Fig. 245, no. 22-24, which could belong to such
60, The provenance of this jug is not so certain. The museum registration does give it as a "Yortan" find, but unlike other Yortan finds it is not specified as "given by P. Gaudin".
81
vessels. More important are Schliemann's finds, Ilios no. 160,133
and 134,61 which were found in the Second and Fourth Cities and rep-
resent a sow, a ram and a hedgehog, respectively. A second jug with the head of a sow on one end is known from Bos-öjük. 62
Zoomorphic
vessels, often of a very superior quality and an astonishing variety,
are a well-known feature of the Balikesir tombs, 63
but at Yortan
only one jug, no. 7 of Shape XVI, could be found to represent an
animal, perhaps a double hedgehog.
Despite the scarcity of the finds it is possible to suggest a
certain date for the Yortan shape. The three jugs of the Schliemann
Collection are ascribed to a E92 data which though unreliably strati- fied can be confirmed by a number of independent sources. In the
first case, while these vessels are special in overall shape, and
probably usage, they are very similar to the jugs of Class A pottery in the form of the spout, neck and tripod feet. In other words there are good reasons for thinking that these special vessels were
made by the same potters who also made the less complicated and more
common jugs. Thus, the spout form of no. 2 or no.. 4 (Fig. 71s 72),
really no different from that of Shape X jugs; or the miniatures
no. 6 and 7 (Fig. 73) bear close resemblance, both in shape and
ornamentation, to the juglets, Shape VI. Secondly, this quite
strong case for giving the shape a Class A pottery date can be
strengthened by several stratified finds in western Anatolia. From
the Chalcolithic levels of Demirci HUyuk (older than Phase I) comes
a small jug without the tripod feet but still clearly representing
a bird vase, perhaps an earlier form of it. 64 Several jugs in
Poliochni "Blue" are more in this form than the Yortan shape; 65
61. H. Schliemann (1880) Ilios. 62. A. Koerte, 1899, Ath. Mitt. 24: 1 ff, P1. He 63. Several examples are illustrated by W. Orthmann, op, cit.,
Taf. 2, no. 1,2. The author was also able to view some examples in a private collection.
64. M. Korfmann, 1979, Ist. Mitt. 29: Abb. 7, no. 7; M. Korfmann, 1978, An, SStt. 28: 18.
65. L. Bernaba-area, on. cit., Tav. XLII as b.
82
they are basically Shape VIII jugs, mounted on tripod feet and lying
in a horizontal position. Similar jugs are found further west, at Karanovo"VII,
66 and in the earlier Ezero A (Horizon XI). 67
Then,, -
several jugs from the Elmali plain appear in burials that can only be interpreted as middle or late E82. One askos, red, burnished
and white painted, was found in Tomb 167 together with a small jug,
a "rattle". as gifts to a child. 68 A similar jug occurs at Beyce-
sultan in-Level XIV, Fig. P. 37, no. 92 which is generally accepted to mark the middle phase of the EB2 period in western Anatolia. A
second askos was found in Tomb 144 together with two "teapots", 69
or the deep bowl with a basket handle and side-spout, which accord- ing to the Troy/Hisarlik sequence belongs to the latter part of Troy
II. In the absence of any contradictory evidence from Anatolia or the East Aegean, it seems certain to give the shape a prolonged use in EB1 and E82. None of the Yortan examples looks particularly
early so that here it may only be a question of an EB2 date.
Obviously these vessels cannot be looked upon as ordinary utensils
of domestic life. Rather, they must have been used in some cultic
ritual or practice. Most of the finds came from the burials, and
a purely secular function such as "toys" seems unlikely, especially
if one bears in mind the large size of some of the examples. Also,
the spout form indicates that the vessel was, with the exception of two miniatures, intended to be used for pouring out liquids, and
was not meant to be merely an object of play.
From the later ES 3a period there is another type of vase of the
piriform. shape Which is also called "askos", or "duck-vase" and occurs
at over one hundred sites in the Aegean. 70 One fragment was found
66. V. Mikov, 1959, Arch. 12i no. 3: 88. 67. G. I. Georgiev, N. 3. Merpert, and G. D. Dimitrov (1979) Ez ero.
Abb. 74. 68. M. 3. Mellink, 1967, AN 71: P1.760 Fig. 112 12. 69.
. Ibid. p. 253, Pl. 76j Fig. 10. 70. R. S. Merrillees, 1979, Acts of the International Archaeological
Symposium. Nicosia; S. Dietz, 1974, Act, Arch. 45: P. 138 ff.
- 83
in Beycesultan Level IX, Fig. P. 53, no. 1,71 a complete pot is said to be from the Izmir region, and at Troy/Hisarlik it is Shape'D. 12
of the fourth settlement. These finds from the islands and Greece
are thought to be of the same date, the earliest examples-occurring in the Phylakopi I Culture of Melos. In Greece it appears together
with the matt painting as "heralds" of the MHI period. 72 Thus,
according to the present evidence, there is a considerable timespan
between the Yortan bird vessels and the Aegean piriform pot which in
any case shows little resemblance to the early shape.
SHAPE XV Triple vessels (Fig. 74; Pl. XIII)
A second type of vessel in an unusual shape consists of three
jars which were made separately and then stuck together on a triangu-
lar plan under a single loop handle. There are only two examples at Yortan, and in fact this is another shape that does not occur in
large numbers elsewhere either. The Yortan examples are not-parti-
cularly fine; no. 2 (Pl. XIII) looks like a failure., or a rough job
where the jars do not fit properly into the intended arrangement. The smallest pot with a narrow neck opening is too small and had to
be raised to the right height by the addition of a tall stud on the
base. No. 1. is a better work where all three jars with everted rim
and horizontal mouth conform to the shape of a single multiple vessel. Both vases are made of a fine and hard fired fabric. The incised
decoration on the smoothed or slipped surface is careless and almost
scratch-like.
There is really no identical material from any of the major
Anatolian sites, but vessels of the same genre do occur over a wide
71. The identification of the Beycesultan find, no. 1. iss however, doubted by some. See above, note 70.
72. Ibid.
84
area. At Beycesultan, Fig. `P. 14, no. 32, in Level XIX is a coarse double jar with a loop handle. A second, quadruple vessel, Fig.
P. 20, "'no. 3, is a little later in date from Level XVIIb. It has
a different arrangement of handles and the ornamentation is not
incised but matt white painted. A second double jar is known from
Karatal-Semayük in Level V of the small central mound 73
which
Mellink tentatively dates to the end of the Troy I period74 but
according to the chronology adopted here should fall into the latter
part of the EB2 period. 75
These finds are not enough to fix a
secure date for the Yortan vases. They only indicate that the shape
is part of the EB2 pottery repertoire of western Anatolia, and that
already in the E81 period some complicated examples were in pro-
duction.
Several stray finds are more like the Yortan examples, Fig. 95
no. 3bj, 35.76 Further east the shape makes a surprising appearance
at Tarsus, ?7 Mersin, 78
and Kazanll79 of Cilicia. At Tarsus-Gözlü
Kule both fragments and complete vessels are said to begin in the
E52 period and continue to be made in the next period, so,
Some are
wheel-made and in certain details different from those of western
Anatolia. "Nevertheless., it is quite obvious that the Cilician triple
and quadruple jars did not have their ancestry in the local pottery tradition and therefore this should represent one of the few
73. M. J. Mellink, 1966, AJA 70: Pl. 61p Fig. 30. 74. M. J. Mellink, 1968, AJA 72: 259. 75. See Chapter 4. p. 111 76. One further triple. jars
_identical . to no. 34, Fig. 95s of the,
_. Institute of Archaeology, London, belongs to the Marburg Collection, and is said to come from Mordc an. See A. Götze (1957) Kultur eschichte Kleinasiens, Taf. 2p a; P. 29, no. 12.
77. H. Goldman 1956) Excavations at Gözlü Kula. Tarsus. II, p. 104, Pl. 260, Pl. 278.
78. J. Garstang (1953) Prehistoric Mersin, Fig. 119, no. 16; Fig. 117, no. 5.
79.3. Garstang, 1938, AAA 25: P1. VII, no. 10. 80. At Mersin, the vessel was found in a pit dating earlier than
EB1 period., but this would be an unreliable stratigraphy. See J. Garstang (1953) Prehistoric Mersin, Fig. 123, no. 16.
85
attestable links with the West in the EB2 period.
The kernos or multiple'vessel is also a characteristic feature
of the Early Bronze Age Cyclades. One splendid example comes from
halos in the Phylakopi I phase. 81 Some simpler double and triple
vessels of the Grotto-Pelos culture are no doubt earlier versions
of this complex object. 82 Such tall and flaring pedestal bases
are quite unknown in the Anatolian repertoire, but one unique jar
from Babakby, Fig. 95, no. 33 , may well be considered a related
form. Its central part is not like the pedestals of the Cycladic
kernoi but belongs to the jars of Shape III. Yet in the overall
impression, and the position of the four small hole-mouth jars, the
vessel'bears some'resemblance to the Cycladic "lamp" kernos. The
implications of such vaguely related objects in terms of contacts
and inter-relations between western Anatolia and the islands is
difficult to evaluate. Obviously there is little familiarity in
the actual shapes and ornamentation of these objects, whether it be
the kernoi, pyxides or schematic idols, but it is also clear that
the choice, of producing such complex and unusual vessels of the
same genre would have stemmed from the existence of'some'similar
ideas and traditions* 84
81, R. C. Bosanquet, 1896-98s BSA 3: 57; J. E. Coleman (1977) Art and Culture of the Cyclades, ed. J. Thimme, Pl. 422-424.
82. Ibid. See also C. Renfrew (1972) The Emergence of Civilisation,
p. 426. 83. P. Getz-Preziosi (1977) Art and Culture of the Cyclades, ed.
J. Thimme, Fig. 88, no. 3., 4. 84. A possible survival of the object and custom in the Greek Ortho-
dox Church has-been suggested for the offering of the first fruit of the harvest. See S. Xanthanidides, 1905-06s BSA 12: 9 ff.
86
SHAPE XVI Rare vessels (Fig. 74-76 ; Pl. XIII)
To this final group belong a number of jugs which contain enough individuality to warrant separate treatment from any of the previous
shape but still seem to belong to the Class A pottery.
No. 1 (Fig. 74 ) is too broken for a definite identification
of shape. The mottled dark surface has interlocking chevrons in
white painting. A long hole on one side could be a side-spout. The forms of the neck and handles or lugs are not obvious.
No. 2 (Fig. 74 ) is a small jug with an obliquely cut spout
and two sets of moulded parallel bars are set on either side of the body. It differs from Shape VII or XIII jugs in having a
narrow neck and flaring spout. It is really more like the jugs of the South-west. 85
No. 3 (Fig. 75 ; Pl. XIII) is a striking if not an ugly black
jug. It stands apart from other fluted jugs of Yortan and of the
South-west (where this mode of decoration is very common) in the
very prominent and heavy nature of the ribs. The broad and flat
beak spout is also an unknown form at Yortan. A jug from Demirci
HUyük is a little similar in the fluted ornamentation. 86 A better
parallel is from Karatac-Semayük. 87 The coarse black fabric,
slipped and burnished to a shiny black surface, is in favour of an EB2 date.
In contrast to this rather heavy pot, no. 4 (Fig. 75 ) is a fine
and delicately modelled black jug and quite unique'in its shape.
85. See P. 68 s note 44. 86. M. Korfmann, 1979, Ist. Mitt. 29: Abb. 11, no. 1. 87. M. J. Mellink, 1965, EA 69: P1.62s Fig. 21; but better
parallels to this form of spout are seen on metal jugs from Alaca HUyUk and Mähmatlar. " H. Z. Kogay (1951) Alaca Hüyük Kazis., 1937-1939, P1. CXXXII, Pl. CLXXVI; H. Z. Ko? aye 1950, Bell. 14: LEV. XXXVIII, Res. 8# 10.
87
This is also the only Yortan vessel where matt white painting is
not used to draw chevrons but instead there are groups of parallel lines. A later date in the E82 seems more appropriate-than one in
the beginnings of the period.
No. 5; Bar* 26 (Fig. 75 ; Pl. XIII ). Similar jugs are known
from Schliemann's finds. Ilios no. 358 is one example but it is
different from the Yortan vessels in the setting of the double spout. In this respect no. 351 is a better parallel.
88 A triple spouted jug was found at Karatal-Semayuk in Tomb 275. A9
No. 6 (Fig. 76 ) is perhaps the most unusual vase of the site. In many ways it is not different from other cutaway spouted jugs;
the spout, handle, globular body on tripod feet are all in the usual
proportions, but this is the only jug of the shape to have the
chevron or zigzag motif in incision rather than in matt white paint- ing. Even more odd are the three sets of large triple holes round the body with each hole enclosed in a bubble-like cover of a very fine clay. All the "bubbles" are restored, which makes one wonder
about the authenticity of such a feature, quite unknown from any-
where else.
Finally there is the handsome jug, no. 7 (Fig. 76 ) which could
also be classified as Shape X. The dark grey fabric is rather fine.
The body is richly ornamented with plastic features which may be
likened to a double hedgehog. This is the only zoomorphic vessel found at Yortan.
88, H. Schliemann, ono cit. 89. M. 3. Mellink, 1969,. 83A 73: P1.73p Fig. 10.
88
CLASS 8 POTTERY
An assortment of twenty vessels of different shapes can be
singled out as a separate group dating from the end of the E82
period. This classification and dating are based partly on the
particulars of each pot and partly as a result of the parallel
material at Troy/Hisarlik. In comparison with the Class A jars
and jugs the fabric is usually finer and harder fired. Yet the
superiority in technique does not necessarily mean higher quality
products and certainly this pottery is far from being attractive
or pleasing to the artistic eye. Often the shaping is irregular,
handles being set crookedly or the base being quite off centre. Also the available shapes are rather uninspired, lacking vitality
or any striking quality. Another characteristic which readily dis-
sociates these vessels from the "A" class is the treatment of the
surface; being made of a finer fabric there is always a smooth
surface finish but often it is dull, left either smoothed in the
drab colours of the fabric - light red, grey, or dirty brown - or
covered over with a thin slip of similar colours. Mottling is rare. Sometimes there is burnishing but it is never lustrous and ornamen- tation is limited to the odd twisted or grooved handle.
The limited comparative material is useful, in determining a date
roughly to the end, or latter part, of the E82 period. The cari-
nated bowls no. 3. Bar. 56 (Fig. 77 ) are completely different from
Shape I bowls of Class A in the everted from of the rim and carinated
lower body. On these lines they may be likened to the Beycesultan
finds, Fig. P. 44, no. 22-24 in Level XIII or even to Troy. IVd. Fig.
182, no. 13-15. Small jars no. 4.5 and 6 (Fig. 77 ) are simple
vessels and similar to equally crude Troy, Ilg finds, Fig. 401, no.
37.988, no. 37.773 and no. 37.992. But such crude and indistinct
vessels can be found at all periods and do not really make reliable
comparative material., A number of similar finds belong to, the
earlier Thermi I-III, Pl. XXXV, no. 68; Pl. VIII, no. 195; P1.
XXXVI, no. 295,308. On the other hand, -two larger jars, no. 7.10
89
(Fig. -77) are almost identical examples of shape C. 28 pf Troy IIg.,
Fig. 401, no. 35.515 and Fig. 403, no. 35.486.. The latter is parti-
cularly close to Yortan no. 10. One further jar from the same phase, Fig. 387, no. 37.989, also matches Yortan no. 8 which can be res- tared to have a round loop handle and a side-spout. No. 11 jar,
pinkish in colour, with two vertically pierced lugs, has ,a tall
cylindrical neck and flanged rim which recall jars of Class A pot- tery. But a closer examination of the vessel reveals considerable
differences; on Shape III there are no pierced lugs but four small loop handles on the upper body, and neither is the rim pierced or
the fabric so refined and hard-fired. It may therefore be more
appropriate to compare no. 11 with the jars of Poliochni "Yellow".,
Tav. CXCIX-CCI. 90 Similarly, although there is a certain degree of
likeness between the jugs, no. 16 and 17 (Fig. 78 ),, and Shape VII-
IX of Class A. the technicalities of both shape and fabric are quite
different.
The last three vessels, no. 18s 19 and 20 (Fig. 79 ) are cer- tainly the most diagnostic late E82 shape of the class. These pots
are usually described as "teapots" because of the side-spout and
the loop handle. All three are in the typical Class B pottery fab-
ric of a fine quality and light colours. No. 18 and 20 are the
finer products. The former teapot has a highly burnished red
surface, similar to that of the bird vessel no. 8 of Shape XIV.
No. 19 is thickly made and little of its brown slip remains over
the light grey fabric. According to Blegen's stratigraphy at Troy/
Hisarlik these vessels do not occur before the IIg phase where they
are shape B. 1O, Fig. 387, no. 35.436 and no. 35.481. Some rather
well preserved examples are also known at Karatag-Semayük. 91 Some
of these parallels have an extra loop handle on the axis of the
basket handle. A number of vessels in the Berlin Collection are
90. L. Berna6ý-Brea (1976) Poliochni II. 91. M. J. Mellink, 1964, AJA 68: Pl. 81g Fig. 20.
90
also certain to stand apart from the "A" class shapes. 92
But at
the time of this research their allocation into any particular class
or group could not be determined.
In summary, there are good reasons, both technical and stylistic, for identifying these twenty odd pots as a class of pottery separate
from that of the "A" shapes and perhaps a little earlier than the
"C" pottery. Naturally, in the absence of a local stratigraphy the
chronological limits and divisions ought to be understood as rather
tentative. One can be certain that none of these vessels is likely
to occur in the E81 period or in the earlier phases of the E82 but
nothing definite can yet be said over the exact duration of the
black and grey burnished shapes which in some cases may well have
lasted to the end of the EB2 in the Yortan region. It is also pos-
sible that a chronological rather than stylistic division between
"B" and "C" pottery is erroneous, that while some of the "B" vessels
continued to be made in the E83 period, such "C" shapes as the depas
or the trefoil spout may well have started already in the EB2 period.
92. W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: Abb. 10 no. 1p 2p 39 5,9 6.9 7; Abb. 2. no. 14p 15.
91
CLASS C POTTERY
The remaining twenty vessels belong to a third class where tech-
nical and typological differences from the rest of the Yortan pot- tery are indeed very marked, leaving little doubt to their separate identity. Unlike Class A and B pottery, here the use of the fast
wheel is in good evidence and often the fabric is the finest pro- duced at the site. Oxidisation is rare and black or dark grey
colours almost never occur. In shape, with a few exceptions, there
is hardly any spout., handle, or body form that may suggest affini- ties with the "A" types. The characteristic Shape VII-VIII or the
cutaway spouted jugs are now completely absent. Instead there is
a smaller jug with a very tall neck and beak spout. The handles
are always round in section and the base is distinctly flat, pro- bably made by string cutting. The comparative material from Troy
Hisarlsk and Beycesultan shows a solid EB3 date which may for once
and for all settle the ambiguous question of the existence of post- EB2 material at Yortan.
No. 1 and 3 (Fig, 79 ; P1. XIV ) are wheel-made tankards
or depas., a hallmark of the late EB2 and EB3 pottery of western Anatolia. 93 The latter vessel is smaller in size and incomplete
at the rim. Its body shape is rather squat and rounded, otherwise
both tankards show the same characteristic features; the neck
flares open to a horizontal mouth and the two round loop handles
are set opposite one another providing a firm grip on the vessel
with both hands; a fine and hard-fired fabric is coated in a thin
red/orange slip which is mostly gone at the removal of a thick layer
of lime encrustation. This calcarious deposition on the pot surface
is often encountered with Class C and to some extent Class B pottery
93. For a study of the shape see P. Z. Spans, 1976, Depas amphikypellon, Ist. Mitt., Beiheft 6. No. 2 of Yortan is classified as Type III0 BI/13p p. 109.
92
possibly indicating that the location of the burials with the pot- tery was different from those with the "A" class pots. On this
point the available drawings of Gaudin are of little help. 94 The
depas A. 39 and A. 43 start in Troy lid and continue into Troy IV. Fig. 380, no. 36.743, from Troy IId is quite similar to no. I of Yortan. However, such single handled Troy III'examples as Fig. 68, no. 33.199 or Fig. 69, no. 33.191, are also rather close in
body shape, allowing an E83 date as well.
No. 2 (Fig. 79) is even more certain to be from the E83 period. The fabric has a very fine quality in a uniform light colour and a
metallic hardness. There are wheelmarks on the surface. An exact
parallel at Troy/Hisarlik or Beycesultan is hard to find but the
goblet form itself, the grooved lines on the tall neck, and the
ring base with a sunken middle section are obvious E83 features.
No. 4 and 5 (Fig. 80 ) are rather diagnostic by their trefoil
shaped spout which again does not occur before Beycesultan Level X
and Troy IIf and IIg. The latter jug is particularly refined with
very thin and hard-fired walls. Its provenance as Yortan is,
however, not certain. No. 4 is a coarser juglet in a uniform grey
colour. At Beycesultan Fig. P. 51, no. 60 7 in Level X are trefoil
or bifoil spout fragments. At Troy the spout occurs on shape 24 in
Late II Fig. 387, no. 36.1150, Troy III Fig. 720 No. 25.1158, Troy
IV Fig. 162, no. 37.904; 170, no. 15p and Troy V Fig. 248, no. 18,
which are really much larger vessels than the Yortan jugs.
No. 7 (Fig. 80' ; Pl. XIV ) is a small jug with a leaf shape
spout and has long been recognised as being different in data from
the rest of the Yortan pottery. 95 The smoothed surface is crudely
ornamented with incised and punctured dots and lines Which, together
94. See Chapter 1. p. 8
95. R. W. Hutchinson, 1935, Iraq 2: 214.
93
with the general form compares well with a Troy IUb jug, Fig. 161,
no. 36,709,
Several jugs with tall-beak spouts are also usually identified
as later in date than the Class A jugs. Two incomplete jugs, no. 11 and-12 (Fig. 81 ; Pl. XXI ) are added here to the well-known
no. 8 and 13 (Fig. 80,81; Pl«XIV, XXI). Once again a rather fine
fabric in a uniform red colour and a thin slip coating typify the
pottery. The single loop handle is always round rather than oval
or angular. Troy/Hisarlik provides the best parallels, all of
which date after the EB2 period. It is shape 8.20, Fig. 72p no. 33.154 or no. 33.179, in Troy lid and continues into Troy V. A
further number of jugs belongs to Schliemann's finds, Ilios no. 360-363 from the Third City, and no. 1149,1151,1154 from the
Fourth City. 96 Karataq-Semayük also gives several good examples
of the shape; two red jugs from Tomb no. 95 of the Main Cemetery
are particularly like no. 8 of Yortan. 97 One different feature of
these Elmali plain jugs is the presence of matt white painting over the burnished red surface. None of the°"C" pottery of Yortan shows this ornamentation which may have been abandoned or forgotten in
the North-west at the breakdown of the EB2 cultures. 98 If soy then
the Karatal finds need to be explained as the continuity of the
technique in this relatively remote part of south-west Anatolia.
Mellink is inclined to date Tomb no. 95 to the end of Troy II but
here a slightly later date in Troy III or the E83-period is pre- ferred. 99
Two cutaway spouted jugs,, no. 9' and 10 (Fig. 800 81)ß
could be looked upon as rare evidence for a survival of the much
earlier Shapes IX and X. Both jugs are made of an extremely fine
96, H. Schliemann, opo cit. 97. M. J. Mellink, 1965, AN 69: P1.610 Fig. 130 14. 98. See Chapter 2p p. 1: 9 99. See Chapter 4. p. 111
94
and hard fired red/orange fabric. No. 9, is certainly the most
delicately manufactured vessel of all the pottery recovered at this
site. Two jugs with similar spouts are illustrated in Ilias no.
1161 and no. 1162 and reported to be frequent in the Fourth City, 100
A further example is at Aphrodisias in Complex II of the Acropolis 101
mound.
The flasks no. 14 and Ber. 36 are distinguished by the lentoid
body shape in very fine fabric and thin walls. The Berlin flask
has a horizontal mouth and two loop handles of the type found on
the depas. The tall neck of no. 14 ends in a cutaway spout and
everted rim, similar to the shape of no. 9 jug. The single loop
handle is gently twisted. The American excavations at, Troy/Hisarlik
did not apparently find this vessel, but there are some good examples
of it in the Schliemann Collection; Ilios no. 364 and no. 1113 are
said to be from the Third and Fourth Cities. 102 This late EB2 or
E83 date can be readily confirmed by the finds at Poliochni-"Yellow"s
Tav. CCX. 103 Though the shape is unknown in the repertoire of
Beycesultan, it does appear further south at KarataV. One flask
is from Tomb no. 41 of the Main Cemetery 104
and a second from Trench
66 of the megaron houses. 105 In Cilicia the lentoid flask in Red
Gritty ware is first found in the EB3 levels of Tarsus. 106
A small jug,, no. 6 (Fig. 80 )' with the horizontal spout cut
away above. the handle is perhaps the most convincing piece of evi-
dence for the existence of the EB3 burials at Yortan. " The shape
B. 23 does not appear before Troy Na., Fig. -162,. no. 37.881. At
100. H. Schliemann, op. cit., p. 551. 101. B. Kadish, 1971, AN 75: P1.299 Fig. 34. 102. H. Schliemann, op. cit. 103. L. Bernabt-Brea, op, cit. 104. M. 3. Mellink, 1964, AN 68: P1.820 Fig. 27. 105. M. 3. Mellink, 1971, AJA 71: P1.820 Fig. 42. 106. H. Goldman (1956) Excavations at Gözlü Kule. Tarsus. II,
Fig. 361, no. 557-559.
95
Beycesultan it is Shape no. 2? of Level Xq Fig. P. 512 no. 3.4 and is last found in Level VIII.
Among such fine products the presence of three vessels, no. 15,,
Bar. 27., no. 16, in rather coarse ware naturally comes as a surprise. They are hand-made, with none of the refined technique of the class. The missing upper parts of the former two jugs makes it almost impossible to ascribe them any definite identity. They are clearly
outside the'"A" class repertoire. The indecision is between a "B"
or "C" date.
No. 17 is a wheel-made grey cup in fine metallic fabric. Un-
doubtedly-it is later than the EB2 pottery of the West. The unbur-
nished surface is slightly scarred with fine parallel lines which
may be the markings of a comb-like tool used in the smoothing pro-
cess. The small loop handle is flat and very broad, quite unlike
any other handle of Yortan. ' Shape A. 36 in Troy IVc and d could be-,
a related shape, but more exact parallels are missing.
Finally a pair of human legs, no. 18 (Fig. -83 ; Pl, xx
appear to belong to a vessel`possibly anthromorphic, and in its
fine quality fabric could also be considered as Class C. Judging
by the surviving fragments, it was made'in a naturalistic and not
schematic fashion. On the feet the toes and ankles are clearly
shown. Pl. XX , no. 18., shows a small bowl-like object. This is
certainly an inaccurate restoration of the surviving fragments. The
top of the right leg is sufficiently preserved to indicate the curvi- linear base of the upper parts of the object. Also the inner surface
of this part of the leg is seen to have been left unsmoothed which
proves that the feet belonged to a closed vessel and not to an open bowl. A similar left foot was found at Beycesultan Level X. Fig.
P. 56p no. 7
96
SUMMARY
P. Gaudin excavated systematically and was also careful in the
recording of the finds, alas only to be wasted or lost after his
death. Today it remains quite impossible to relate all the objects to individual burials. Among the bowls, no. 1 and 2 (Fig. 23 )
could be from pithos no. 48 (Fig. 5) or the lentoid flask no. 14
(Fig. 14) from pithos no. 94 (Fig. 7 ),, but these are the few
exceptions. The cemetery could have been used at all times without
any one spot containing the burials of one period or phase of the
Early Bronze Age. on the other hand it is also possible that cer- tain parts, is, to the South of the Kirka5aq - Kelembe road, hold
only those tombs with the "B" or "C" class pottery. In any case
as an archaeological rule the burial grounds and the tombs themselves
are unsatisfactory for stratigraphic observations. The method of
studying the finds of Yortan has, therefore, been a comparative one. An observant eye would be quick to note some of the marked changes in the making of this pottery. The underlying principle of the
research has been first to observe these changes and try to explain them in terms of cultural assemblages and relative dates through the
stratified deposits of western Anatolia. Naturally this is not a
perfect way of bringing any site into the full light of prehistory; but as long as there is a lack of adequate stratigraphic investi-
gations. of the settlement sites it is the only. means available for
a better understanding of Yortan. Also, with all the drawbacks of
such a purely comparative analysis in mind, some of the results need
not be doubted at all, while a good deal more appear to be quite
plausible. For example, it is obvious that the cemetery does not
contain anything that exceeds the Early Bronze Age period, at least
97
not in the excavated area. 107 It is also certain that almost the
whole of the Early Bronze Age is represented by the potteryoWand the proposed three-fold classification - A. 9 8p C- corresponds
roughly to the E32 and E83 periods. Less certain and more like
tentative suggestions are the more exact definitions of the indivi-
dual shapes and types which in turn contribute to a further refine-
ment of the chronological limits.
By far the largest material is the "A" class pottery in three
main types - bowls, jars, jugs - with a further sub-division into
some sixteen shapes. A vigorous comparative breakdown of the mate-
rials summarised on Table 1. establishes a firm E82 date of western Anatolia, or more specifically the sequence of Troy I-III Thermi
I-IV and Beycesultan XVI-XIV. Such vessels as the carinated bowl
with a simple tubular lug (Shape I)y small jars with short collar
neck (Shape IV), or jugs with obliquely cut spout (Shape VI-VII)
are well-known and widely recurring types. Considering that on the
one hand are a number of sites known from the material remains of the living and on the other possessions of the dead, not every shape
of E82 western Anatolia can be found at Yortan; but this in no way
weakens the argument based on these parallels and equations. The
Yortan pottery is basically a selective group of pottery excluding
such domestic wares as cooking pots or storage vessels, but still because it was selected by the living people from their own pottery industries it ought to represent, at least in part, the contemporary
pottery repertoire. The numerous parallels cited are proof of this
view. What the Yortan pottery cannot show is a full repertoire of the Early Bronze Age of the North-west. For such a detailed knowledge
107, P. Gaudin excavated several trenches on the nearby mound of cavdar Tepe (see Chapter 1s P. 7 ). The plans show three pithoi, but the meaning of these finds is not entirely clear. One of the pithoi is shown in a lying position with the mouth facing south. If a burial, then it ought to belong to a period later than the Early Bronze Age.
98
many more of the settlement and burial sites need to be excavated. A few important omissions at Yortan can be found among the finds of
other burials of the area. One such missing shape is the bowl A. 6
of Troy I. Fig. 238,253,254, and Thermi Class As Bowl 5a, and Class B Bowl 8.5. It is a bowl with straight or curving sides and the thickened rim inside forms a band-like surface which is sometimes decorated in incision. Fig. 89. no. 2., 3s 5s 6. illustrate several
examples from the robbed pithos burials of the Balikesir area.
Thermi and Troy/Hisarlik are of little help in establishing the
earliest occurrence of the "A" class shapes. Both sites are thought
to be contemporary in their earliest levels which begin on the virgin soil-without a trace of the preceding period. Kumtepe is the only
site with some relevant material. Kumtepe Ic has long been estab- lished as a contemporary of Troy I where most of the parallels to
the Yortan pottery are to be found. The earlier Kumtepe Ib deposits
contain none of the pottery found at Yortan. The inevitable conclu-
sion has therefore been that the earliest date for the Yortan burials
is from Kumtepe Ic or Troy I phase of the Early Bronze Age. Further
support may be found in the fact that this Kumtepe Ib type pottery is also widely known on the settlement sites near Yortan and that
had it been contemporary with Yortan some elements of it ought to
have appeared in the shapes of Class A.
Despite this apparently secure position for the upper limits of Yortan it is felt here that some aspects of the question need to be
examined with a more critical approach. Thus., what has been called the Kumtepe Ib type pottery is actually solely determined from quite
small soundings on this rather small mound on the fringes of the
Troad, and it seems not unreasonable to view the site and the re-
covered material with some caution as perhaps not fully representa-
tive of the culture concerned. The plains further south of the
Troad are actually richer in Type Ib material and may well be the
99
centre of the"culture. 108 Furthermore, the "A" class pottery of
Yortan and the parallel finds at Troy I and Beycesultan XVI appear
in a fully developed stage of production, and since no other region
of Anatolia can be pointed out as the origins of the shapes present
there is a reasonable case for suggesting that the pottery developed
in the area of the Yortan Culture and the "A" class does not repre-
sent the earliest stages of this development. The so-called Kumtepe
Ib phase must be a part of the development which was not quite
recognised at Kumtepe itself. According to the adopted Troy-Yortan-
Beycesultan synchronisation, Beycesultan EB1 levels are contemporary
with the Kumtepe Ib phase but without signs of strong contacts.
The fragment of a cutaway spout and a small jug with obliquely cut
spout in Level XIX are notable. Such jugs are not found in Kumtepe
Ib and the former shape is rare even in Troy I. If these finds are
not contaminations from the upper levels then they provide some
evidence in support of assigning some"of the Yortan shapes to the
earlier EB1 period. Indeed, outside Anatolia the characteristic
jug'with obliquely cut spout does appear in deposits recognised as
preceding Troy I pottery; at Poliochni it is in the Black and Blue
periods with Kumtepe Ib bowls, and at Ezero from Horizon XIII on-
wards. Similarly the Yortan tankards (Shape XIII) could be compared
with the vessels of the EBI or even Late Chalcolithic of Beycesultan.
In short these observations may suffice for expressing some caution
over the accepted affinity of the Kumtepe Ib phase pottery to that
of Troy I; at Yortan the earliest of the burials are, for the time
being, seemingly certain to be roughly contemporary with the found-
ing of the site at Hisarlik and on Lesbos, but there is the possi-
bility of some of the shapes, is. carinated bowl, jugs with obliquely
cut or cutaway type spouts, or the askos, having earlier beginnings
in the so-called Kumtepe Ib phase or Beycesultan Level XIX-XVII;
the jug with obliquely cut spout could, for example, belong to a
sequence of development not too different from that of the carinated
bowl which in its sharply angular Troy I profile has its beginnings
108. See also Chapter 4., p. 107
100
in the rolled or slightly incurved rims of'Kumtepe Is and Ib.
Returning to the question of a final date for Class A pottery,
most of the parallels do not suggest survival later than mid-Troy II or the end of Beycesultan Level XIV. Class B pottery is indis-
putably the late E82 material of the site. In particular the
"teapot" no. 18-20 (Fig. 79 ) is a good example of this date.
Nevertheless, several odd finds and some'typological observations
do indicate the possibility of at least some of the "A" shapes
lasting throughout the period and being found together with the
"B" class vessels. For example, bowls no. 8 and 9 (Fig. 24 )
are carinated with a horizontal loop handle, a feature which does
not start before Troy II. The only uncertainty over this parallel
is that most of the Troy II bowls are wheel-made and much deeper in
body. The case of the bird-shaped vases, which are found at
Karatal-Semayük together with the "teapot"s is more certain. On
less certain terms one may detect a typological development in a
number of shapes, through the EB2 early, middle and late phases.
Among the jars with tall neck, Shape III, several are noted for
showing uniformity in overall colour in lighter tones, less mottling
and sharper outlines which could be thought later than the more
rounded and dark burnished examples. In Shape X those jugs with
taller and shallow cutaway spouts of group four (Fig. 58-60) come
near to resembling the tall beak spouted jugs of the E03 period and
may also be later than the shorter spouts. Another such possibility
is the jug type no. 26-31 of the same shape, with a cutaway spout
form where the top part is cut to slant towards the front of the
pot. The matt white painting on these jars and jugs need not be an
obstacle for a date in the late EB2 period. It is correct to ob-
serve that this method of decoration is largely absent in Late Troy
II and Beycesultan Level XIII; but it is so at all times at either
site and the method may well have had a more popular and persistent
use in the Yortan Culture.
Consequently it seems correct to place most of Class A pottery
in the first half of the E82 period but also to keep an open mind
101
about the possibility of some of the shapes continuing to the end
of the period. As far as the stratigraphy of western Anatolia stands Class B vessels are best put to this latter part of the period as
well but the upper limits in relation to Class C pottery should
also be kept fluid. Compared with Class A jars and jugs the dif-
ferences in shape., ware and ornamentation of these "C" vessels are immediately obvious and need no further qualification. Rather close
parallels at Troy III-IV and to a lesser degree at Beycesultan give them an EB3 date but perhaps not so late as Troy U. The distinction
between this and "B" material is less outstanding and some degree of
merging in certain shapes is conceivable. The jug with the spout
cut away above the handle, the light grey goblet with grooves, or the lentoid flasks are EB3 beyond doubt while the tankard or depas,
or the trefoil spout., could start at an earlier date among Class B
vessels. Thermi on Lesbos is completely without "8" or "C" shapes.
Since Town I-IU are strongly connected to Class "A" pottery of the
North-west, this absence of the "late" Yortan pottery tends to
favour the end of the settlement falling quite short of the and of Troy II.
This chronological assessment of the pottery allows a lifespan
of well over 1000 years for the cemetery of Yortan. In comparison
with such a prolonged use of the grounds the finds are not large in
quantity and there is an unequal representation of the different
phases of the Early Bronze Age. Possibly the use of the site was
not continuous and there was a break at the end of the E82. At the
same time it must be pointed out that the excavator's notes make it
clear that not all of the burials were uncovered by Gaudin; some
were robbed by the locals while a good many pithoi may still lie to
the Korth and South of the Kirka6ac - Kelembe route. It is also
within reason to take the one hundred and seven pithoi as belonging
to a small community of a nearby village site which came to be
founded on the expansion of the settlements in the nearby fertile
plains towards the and of the EB1 period and which lasted until
towards the end of the EB3 period.
I SHAPE BOWLHno. 5.6
I BOWL no,
I 81
SHAJARIII I SJUGLETI SHAPE JUG
-VIII
Fig. 261, no. 16
Fig. 259 Iej fj gp hs j Fig. 263 Fig. 258, Fig. 163 1d
no. 36.692 -- 7< Ln,
no. 35,575 no. 35.513 no. 35.429
no. 350,641 Fig. 239 no. 23,24 I In0' J0'071 I no. 35.540; no. 35.541
no. 36.539 Fig. 236, no. 29,322 34 no. 36.840
Fig. 235, no. 2
no. 353 no. 321
no. 36,686 1 Inö. 36.760
no. 36.689
no. 411 no. 410
no. 249s, 250 no. 196,9 200s 201
no. 113,114
no. 36.843 no. 36.676; no. 36.735
no. 413; no. 419 no. 327; no. 328
no. , 288
no. 233; no. 253
no. 140 Ino. 161 no. 126
no. 556. # no. 18j, 70
xvi
XVIc
XVII XVIII
XIX
TAE I
Fig. 412 no. 29,34
no. 35,649
no. 287
no. 204
103
CHAPTER 4 CHRONOLOGY
A precise time-scale for any archaeological deposit is deter-
mined either by scientific dating (C14) or by the historical dates.
Neither are available at Yortan itself, and it has therefore been
essential to outline the position of the site as clearly as possible
next to the rest of western Anatolia. Yet this laborious comparative
study could only produce a relative date since none of the three
main sites is itself furnished with absolute chronology. 1 The
scientific dates in western Anatolia are available from only two
sites, Aphrodisias and Karata? -Semayük, while the latter have to
be derived from Mesopotamia and Egypt via the finds of Tarsus-GÖZlü
Kula in Cilicia. In this respect the central plateau with its
earliest written records of Anatolia at large is very important.
But the research into deeper prehistoric levels of such important
sites as Kültepe or Karahüyük/Konya has yet to reach a level where
solid correlations with the West are demonstrable. 2 In the meantime the stratigraphy of Tarsus continues to be almost the only inter-
mediary grounds between the historic East and the prehistoric Aegean.
In other words, at the present state of Anatolian archaeology there
exists over the immense peninsular of Turkey a handful of excavated
sites, placed widely from one another and which must be correlated internally into an overall pattern of relative chronology that can then be pinned down onto an absolute scale. A reverse method where the absolute dates are used to synchronise levels and sites is as
1. Several C14 dates from Beycesultan are generally rejected as being too low. See S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan Ij p.
+19 (Level XXXIII) 3014 ± 50 BC, and p. 75 (Level XXVIII)
2740 ± 62 BC. Also M. 3. Mellink, 1964, AN 68: 304. 2.0. Easton, 1976, An. St. 26: 157 made a brave attempt at cor-
relating the sequence of Karahüyük/Konya with those of Tarsus
and Troy. Twenty seven levels of this important site are yet to be published, and one cannot draw conclusions on the general remarks of the excavator. 3. Yakar, 1979, An, St. 290 outlines the weaknesses of the material.
104
yet unreliable due to the imperfection of, the method itself (C14)
and to the inconsistencies-among the dates. It may perhaps become
a primary method of dating when many more sites are scientifically investigated and many more consistent dates obtained.
Besides the rarity of the stratigraphically investigated sites,
several defects inherent in the existing material complicate the
matter further. For example, it is not often realised that at Beycesultan, a huge mound ca. 7-5 m in height and ca. 1 km long at the base, the Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age periods are known only-from a small sounding, S X, 3
which at the lowest Level
XXXIX measures no more than ca. 5mx5m. Moreover, Level XVII-
XIII, that is part of the E91 and the whole of the E62 periods, cut, through a series of complexes best interpreted as shrines and the
pottery from them could be regarded as being selective. 4 Thus, it
is very possible that the contents of these levels are somewhat limited, allowing only a brief glance into a much larger repertoire. The second vitally important site of Troy/Hisarlik on the other hand
has often been over-emphasised for its truly crude material, that
being a direct. result of the site's identification with the mythical
city of Troy. 5 When first proposed by Schliemann the idea was not
widely accepted.. Today the reverse is true with the unfortunate
outcome that the sequence and finds of the site tend to be viewed
with a biased approach where there is an unconscious or conscious
assumption of its supremacy over other sites. It is hoped that one
result of this study has been to undermine this bias further, and
3. S. Lloyd and 3. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan I. p. 18# Fig. 3. 4. However, M. 3. Mellink does not accept these buildings to be
"shrines". See, 1964, A3A 68: 304. 5.3. Mellaart has now raised a strong voice against this largely
unnecessary identification. See, Troy, a re-assessment, Trans-, actions of the IV International Colloquium on Aegean Prehistory, 1977. Sheffield. On that occasion the author was also able to raise similar objections. Throughout this research the "mythi-
cal" and geographic name of the site, Troy/Hisarlik, has been used.
105
in a way reverse it in the direction of reviewing this small mound
on the Troad as merely a prehistoric site which might have come into
existence on the expansion of the inland cultures of the North-west.
The American excavations under C. W. Blegen were scientific and are
adequately published; but already much damage had been inflicted
on the deposits by the pioneering work of H. Schliemann and of his
other successors, and Blegen was left to work out a full stratigraphy from a number of small areas.
6 Thus the results are often unsatis-
factory and a large number of finds from the preceding excavations just float precariously between levels or "Cities". Possibly one'-
day all the material will be assembled into a more coherent body of
finds. Meanwhile one must be content with what there is and without
synchronising these two major sites the question of, absolute chrono
logy cannot be undertaken.
A convenient starting point may be where there is for once a
general agreement that the end of Troy II coincides with the end of
Beycesultan Level XIII, and the EB3a in western Anatolia starts in
the succeeding Troy III and Beycesultan Level XII. At Yortan Class
C pottery is ascribed to this period. For the earlier EBI and 2
levels, however, no'such generally acknowledged correlation exists;
and'it is perhaps to this point that the analysis of the Yortan "A"
pottery makes a significant contribution.
At the-publication of the Beycesultan excavations J. Mellaart
initially offered the following equation: 7
EB1 Beycesultan Level XIX - XVII
EB2 Beycesultan Level XVI - XIII
Troy I
Troy II
D, French in his study of the prehistoric remains of north-west
Anatolia used this chronology suggesting that most of the Yortan
6. D. Eastons 19762 An. St. 26: 147. 7. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart, op. cit., p. 147.
106
pottery falls into Troy II. 8 Then at the publication of Poliochni
on Lemnos and of the preliminary reports of the Karatac-Semayük
excavations 3. Mellaart altered his view and proposed a shorter span for the Troy/Hisarlik sequence:
9
EBI Beycesultan Level XIX - XVII
Beycesultan Level XVII - XV
EB2 Beycesultan Level XIV - XIII
a
w
n
Kumtepe Ib
Troy I
Troy II
With some minor alterations D. Easton adopted this synchronisation, but more recently 0. Yakar went back to the earlier suggestion, basing himself on the publication of the Kumtepe excavations.
10
Our analysis of the Yortan pottery is clearly in favour of 0.
Mellaart's revised synchronisation, and to argue to the contrary
would need a number of highly unlikely assumptions; thus if Troy
I is to be equated with Beycesultan Level XIX-XVII then the Yortan
"A" pottery, which has strong affinities with Troy I but not with Beycasultan EB1 levels, has to be viewed as belonging to a site
geographically poised in between the two sites and yet with very
slender links to Beycesultan; in the following phase the position is reversed, and while Yortan "A" pottery is strongly represented in Beycesultan Level XVI-XIVO there is relatively little in Troy
II. Obviously this is an unsatisfactory arrangement of the material
and more a way of forcing a pre-conceived idea upon the evidence. There is reason to believe that after a prolonged development of the pottery in the area of Balikesir, stronger contacts came to
be established with the South-west and with further North-west. "
It is quite unfounded and unnecessary to see the Troad as the centre
of the growth and spread of this pottery; or to be more specific,
having now come to full grips with the pottery of Yortan there is
S. 0. French, 1969, An. St. 19: 560 57p 65. 9. J. Mellaart, 1971, Studia Balcanica 5: 119 ff.
10. J. Yakar,, 1979s An, St. 29: 57 ff. 11. See Chapter 5sp. 1'50
107
surely just as good a case for arguing that the Yortan Culture was
a point of diffusion which by the E81 period had reached the Troad
coast and Beycesultan in the opposite direction,
The position of the Kumtepe Ib pottery is as yet hard to assess. No doubt this is the material that underlies the Yortan pottery and is best known for its rolled rim bowls. The typical carinated bowl
of Yortan and Troy I appears in the Ib 4 phase after a long develop-
ment starting in Ia. 12 No other Yortan shape has been recognised
in the Ib phase. This could, however, be accidental. It is quite
unlikely that such Yortan shapes as jars of Shape II, III, or jugs
of Shape VII-VIII would have appeared suddenly without a trace in
the ancestral Ib phase. J. Mellaart has also expressed similar
doubts, pointing out that in the pre-Troy I "Black" and "Blue" of
Poliochni there are Ib bowls as well as other shapes such as the
jug with obliquely cut spout and its askos version. He suggested
that because of these shortcomings of the Kumtepe material, the name
of the culture (Kumtepe Ib) might eventually be changed into some-
thing else, 13
If this review of the Kumtepe material is correct
then here may be the answer for the difficulties of synchronising it with any site, in Anatolia and the Aegean. As far as the recog-
nised shapes go it has quite a wide distribution over to west Thrace
and East Macedonia, 14 but in no level of Beycesultan can it be
identified with satisfaction. Possibly at this time the Gediz
valley formed the southern limits of the north-west pottery with
with little or no extension further south while the Beycesultan
Late Chalcolithic north of the Gediz has been recognised only at
Kayilslar and Pajaköy. 15
Kumtepe Ib bowls occur on Chios but further
south Tigani of Samos is closer to Beycesultan. 16
12, See Chapter 3.9 p. 13.3. Mellaart, 1971, Studia Balcanica 5: 120. 14. D. French, 1961, An. St. 11: 112 ff. 15. Ibid. 16. Ibid. Also 3. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan I, p. 107.
108
In his long overdue publication of the Kumtepe excavations, 3. W. Sperling takes quite a different line of equations and places the beginnings of Troy I back to the Late Chalcolithic 4 of Beyce-
sultan. 17 It is a weak synchronisation based on only a few odd
shapes. As Sperling admits, the contemporaneity of Ib and Beyce-
sultan Late Chalcolithic 3 cannot be observed among the finds and the carinated bowls of the latter site "seem vaguely related in
style" to the Ib fragments. Better demonstrated, he goes on, is the equation of Troy I and Beycesultan Late Chalcolithic 4. which
again is based on a number of fragments only, without taking into
account the rest of the pottery. One shard of Troy I bowl A. 5 (Fig. '259) with a vertical handle is compared with a rather small fragment in Beycesultan Late Chalcolithic 4.18, Two other fragments
of the Troy I bowl are actually in different shape. 19 His second
comparative shape, A. 6 bowl, with flaring sides and rim thickened
inside, occurs in Kumtepe Ic but not at Beycesultan, though he
considers one bowl in Level XX, Fig. P. 12, no. 35p and a second in
Level XIX, Fig. P. 14, no. 1. as similar in shape. Thirdly, the
carinated bowl (Troy A. 12) of Beycesultan Level XIX-XVII is des
cribed as rounded in profile, ignoring those with angular carina-
tion., 20 and therefore more like the Middle and Late Troy I examples,
so that the beginnings of Troy I should fall to levels earlier than
Level XIX. Throughout his argument Sperling takes a rather narrow
vision of the shapes and wares involved without explaining the many
contradictory sides of his conclusions. Here is also a good example
of interpreting Troy/Hisarlik as a site where the appearance and
disappearance of various elements are of primary importance over the
rest of western Anatolia and the Aegean. Why could the carinated
bowl not have originated elsewhere, perhaps in the Yortan Culture
17, J. W. Sperling., 1976, Hasp. 45, no. 4: 357 ff. 18. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart (1962) Beycesultan I, Fig. P. 13,,
no. 10. 19. C. W. Blegen (1950) Troy I Fig. 254, no. 27,, 29. 20. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart, op. cit., Fig. P. 149 no. 20-23;
Fig. P. 15., no. 28j, 29.
109
area,, and reached the Troad coast at a later date?
Naturally the synchronisation of the two major sites via the Yortan pottery cannot deliver the final verdict but at least
it has the advantage of offering the least contradictory scheme
within the known facts of west Anatolian archaeology. Moreover,
Thermi on Lesbos allows a certain degree of cross-examination of the results. Even before the publication of the American exca-
vations, W. Lamb was able to compare Troy I with Thermi I-IV,
and there is now abundant material showing that even better paral- lels can be drawn with the Yortan, "A" pottery, and indirectly with Beycesultan Level XVI-XIV, Thus, all three sites, with Yortan in
the middle can be locked into one roughly contemporary unit as the EB2 period. A more problematic aspect of the Thermi sequence. is defining the limits of Town IV-V, or the end of the Early
Bronze Age period at the site. The excavator was in favour of a final date before the and of Troy 11,21 but a longer sequence has
also been considered. 22 Basically the difficulty is in the rarity
of comparative material from the "C" phase. Among the diagnostic
shapes are fragments of the face jar and sauceboat. 23
The latter
vessel is a, familiar feature of the Early Cycladic and Early Helladic.
It is found in the Keros-Syros culture and is the type artifact
of Lerna''II (EHII). 24 At Troy/Hisarlik the shape is best known
for the silver cup in IIg. It is also found with the Urfirnis
sherds in Blegen's Middle Troy I phase. The stratification of
the latter finds is, however, uncertain, involving the important
question of tying up the Early Helladic sequence with the Early
21. W. Lamb (1930) Excavations at Thermi on lesbos. p. 210. 22. D. Easton, op. cit., p. 155. 23. W. Lamb, op. cit., Pl. XIII. 24. J. L. Caskey, 1960p Hasp. 29: 290.
110
Bronze Age of Anatolia. 25 Whether the EHI starts in Troy I or II,
the existence of the sauceboat at Thermi only proves that the
occupation of the site lasted to the end of Troy I or into the
early phase of Troy II and not necessarily the full length of the
EB2 period. In any case, there is always the possibility of the
vessel reaching Lesbos before the Troad coast. The face urn (Troy
D. 13)ß which seems to be an Anatolian feature, is first found in
Troy IId, 26 and later in IIg. 27 Otherwise, Thermi is without any
of the well-known Late E82 or EB3 material, the wheel-made pottery in general, perhaps, being the most significant absentee. The
Yortan synchronisation is in support of a short E82 phase at the
site; in Chapter 3 many parallels drawn between Thermi I-IV and
Yortan "A" pottery make it quite clear that the island was within
the cultural sphere of the opposite mainland in the first half of the E82 period., but neither, Class B or C pottery of Yortan can be
distinguished in Town IV or V. which, on the assumption that Lesbos
remained close, to the development of the, mainland pottery, must mean that this late EB2 period is not present at the site.
The accommodation of Karataf-Semayük and Aphrodisias into the
north-west sequence is less troublesome, though firm conclusions
must await the full publications. According to 1. J. flellink, Level
I-V of the small mound and some of the burials fall into the Troy I
period. 28 It is not a widely accepted view, others preferring a
longer or later sequence where Level I-V overlaps into Troy II and
25. The position of Blegen's so-called EH sherds in Troy I has long been in dispute, and cannot really be solved to everyone's satisfaction until fresh deposits are examined. We tend to agree with those who are familiar with the material and consider it to be out of context. See 0. French, 1961, An. St. 11: 119 ff. and 3. Mellaart, 1971, St. Bal. 5: 124 ff. But also S. S. Weinberg (1971) Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. R. W. Ehrich., p. 303, and D. Easton, op. cit., p. 151 ff.
26. C. W. Biegen (1950) Troy I. Fig. 405, no. 37-1033. 27. Ibid., Fig. 405, no. 11-339. 28. M. 3. Mellink, 1968, AJA 72: 259.
111
some of the finds exceed the end of the E92 period. 29
Obviously
without the final publication it would be unwise to dispute the
excavator's tentative conclusions, but since the present synchro- nisation of Beycesultan and Troy/Hisarlik is different from that
accepted by Nellink some re-adjustment of the levels is inevitable.
On the whole, the parallels to Yortan are not many but there is
enough. to suggest that at least some of the "A" shapes are similar
and probably contemporary. Such other shapes as the depas or teapot
are late EB2 material showing that the large, sprawling cemetery
conceals a long E82 sequence but it is difficult to imagine the same duration for the small'settlement point of the central mound. The
present choice is, therefore, for a beginning of the small mound in
the first half of the EB2 but perhaps not from its earliest stages. Some of the tombs and megara must fall into the late E82 but the
end of Level V should not be prolonged to such an extent. Such
tombs as no. 1.41s 95.9 and the megara in Trench 37 and elsewhere
with wheel-made plates, depas, or the lentoid jug, bring the
Karataq sequence into the E83 period or Beycesultan Level XII and Troy III.
There is far less published material from Aphrodisias, hence
greater reliance on the tentative remarks of the excavator. B.
Kadish describes the earliest finds at Pekmez Level VII as contem-
porary with the Late Chalcolithic 4 of Beycesultan. 30 On the Acro-
polis mound there is a much longer sequence of occupation than at Karataq, unfortunately limited to small soundings. Complex XI is
said to have dark incised or matt white painted pottery. These
burnished wares last until Complex VIII-VII where the wheel-made
29,0. Mellaart, 1971, St. Sal. 5: 122 ff., suggests a continuous sequence from the beginnings of the EB2 period up to the EB3, or in between Beycesultan XVI and VIII. D. French, 1969, An. St. 19: 570 is in favour of an EB2 or Troy II sequence with the and of Karatat EB2 coinciding with the end of Troy II.
30. B. Kadish, 1971, A3A 75: 138 ff.
112
pottery appears. 31 In Complex VI stacks of the characteristic
wheel-made plates are found. The appearance of the potter's wheel in western Anatolia is problematic. The earliest evidence of, it-' is in Troy IIb, but at Beycesultan it appears at a much later date in Level XIIIa, the last phase of the EB2 period. Such a wide gap is difficult to account for. Perhaps future research will alter the "facts" in favour of a more uniform distribution. The techno-
logy could have reached the area from the East or it could have had
an independent evolution in the West from the simple turn table. 32
Meanwhile, one could assume that at least in the South-west there
ought to be some proximity in the occurrence of the device at
various centres, and that Complex VII of Aphrodisiac should not
stand too far apart from 8eycesultan Level XIIIa. In Kadish's
reports more is said for Complex II which contains Troy II-IV and Beycesultan Level XII shapes such as the teapot, dipper, cooking
pot or a small jug with ribbed neck. 33 One illustrated jug is
identical to no. 9. (Fig. 80 ; Pl. XIV) of Yortan Class "C"
pottery. 34 In the succeeding Complex I there are idols and volute
features of Troy IV-V and Beycesultan EB3b. In Complex 8 and C
the Middle Bronze Age is reached.
Having outlined a system of relative chronology for the Anatolian
sites there remains the straightforward task of transforming the
frame onto an absolute time scale. From Level'II of the'Karatal-Semayük
mound a number of charcoal samples give a round date of c. 3000 BC35
which should then pin down a part of the Yortan "A" pottery and of the EB2 Beycesultan but not the earliest phases of the period. A
second and much higher point is provided by the Pekmez mound where
a date at c. 4350 - 4060 1 70 BC stands for Level VIId36 or the Late
31. B. Kadish, 1971, AN 75: 138 ff. 32. P. Warren, 1969, Antiquity 43: 224 ff. 33. B. Kadish, op. cit. 34. Ibid. 35.1966, Radiocarbon 8: 352 ff. For calibration, see D. Easton,
1976, An, St. 26: 170. 36.1975, Radiocarbon 17: 205. D. Easton, op. cit., p. 169.
113
Chalcolithic 4"of Beycesultan. - The beginnings of Yortan may then
lie somewhere in between these dates, ca. 3500 BC would be a
reasonable guess. A more recent set of dates is now becoming avail-
able from the Demirci HUyük excavations. The exact position of the
Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age levels between Phase E and Phase P has yet to be established; but it has already become
obvious that this site occupies an important fortified position between western and central Anatolia, with a deep stratigraphy ex- tending back to the Late Chalcolithic of Beycesultan. In Phase P
and K nine consistent C14 dates range between c. 3420 and c. 3750 BCC
thus in absolute agreement with the high chronology of the scien- tific dating. 37 A further and rather convenient confirmation of
such early beginnings for the Anatolian E92 is from Bulgaria at, Ezero; the transitional Horizon VIII-VII is noted for the appear-
ance of new elements that are found in Troy I or the EB2 of north-
west Anatolia. In Horizon VI-V these elements are well established
and continue into Horizon IV-III. The excavators then offer the 38 following synchronisation:
Ezero Horizon VIII-V
Horizon IV-III
0
s
Early and Middle Troy I
Late Troy I
Troy II pottery is found in the top two horizons, A number of C14
-dates from Horizon VII centre around c. 3400 BC with the seed samples
giving c. 3340 1 BC. 39 This is in agreement with the Anatolian dates
allowing enough time for the north-west elements to spread into the
Balkans. Higher up in Horizon IV the seed samples are
37, M. Korfmann, 1978, An. St. 28: 18. 38. G. I. Georgiev, N. J. Merpert and G. 0. Dimitrov (1979) Ezero.
p. 542. 39. Ibid., p. 518. The Aegean dates are also within these limits,
though the value of these absolute points is reduced by the absence of solid comparative material with Anatolia. The EHI of Eutresis gives c. 3400 t 75 BC, and Sitagroi IV c. 3380,1 100 BC and c. 2960 1 100 BC.
114
c. 2950 ± 80 BC, 40 which may be taken as a round date for the end of
Troy I or the first half of the EB2 period. 41
Lower down the scale the next set of dates is from Complex IV
and II of the'Acropolis mound., Aphrodisias. In Complex IV the char-
coal samples range between c. 2500 ± 86 and c. 2120 ± 55 BC, 42 and
in the more recent Complex II the seed samples which yield more
reliable dates than wood are c. 2150 ± 59 and 2060 !. 55 BC. 43
Yortan Class B and C pottery may than be placed roughly in between
2500 BC and 2100 BC. The rest of the divisions have to be worked
out by pure guesswork and need not be pursued further. It would be quite rash to place too much reliance on these scientific dates.
A glance at the available dates is enough to spot the many inconsis-
tencies, sometimes even within the samples of the same stratum. On
the other hand they do provide a broad framework that is in agree-
ment with the archaeological conclusions.
Returning to the synchronisation of western Anatolia and Cilicia,
again one`. is confronted with the unnecessary complication of facts
due to inadequate or incomplete research of the two main sites, Mersin- Yümük Tepee and Tarsus-Gözlü Kule, the latter having the
better stratigraphy which still appears to be quite oversimplified
and in need of a thorough revision. What seems to be certain is
that Cilicia had at all times maintained pottery cultures that were
distinctly different from those of the West and under the influence
of central Anatolia and northern Syria. Thus when at ca. 11.5 ma large quantity of distinctly west Anatolian elements appears it
makes a startling change from the local wares and is interpreted as the beginnings of a new period, E83. The tankard, or depas, the
40, Ibid. One charcoal sample gives c. 3390-3000 ± 80 BC. 41, c. 2950 ± 64 from EHII Eutresis is in favour of the EHII
beginnings starting in Troy II. 42.1.971, Radiocarbon 13: 369. For calibration, see D. Easton,
op, cit., p. 169. 43. Ibid.
115
fluted depas, wheel-made plates, bell-shaped goblet, or dipper, are typical among the new pottery. In the words of the excavator, the-
change "between E82 and EB3 is striking and indeed dramatic in its
Implications". 44 Among the wares that have disappeared is the charac-
. teristic incised, cross-stitched Red Gritty Ware. Destruction is also reported.
While there can be no doubt about the west Anatolian origins of the so-called E83 Tarsus, it remains an unsettled problem whether the EB2 or E83a of the West is the contemporary period.
45 The
final solution must await further fresh material; meanwhile the
available records appear to make better sense if the end of EB2
and the beginnings of the E83 are considered contemporary with the
beginnings of Tarsus EB3. Such Troy shapes as A. 11,120 163 182
44, and the volute features that are found in Tarsus E83 actually belong to Troy III-IV and not to Troy 11* 46
Moreover, the facts
of the Tarsus stratigraphy indicate a sudden point in time when the
western features arrived, marked by,, destruction, which naturally finds a convenient explanation in the period of upheaval that is
reported for the end of the E82 of the West. As far as the levels
preceding Tarsus E83 are concerned one simply cannot-draw the line
in relation to the western sequence. The parallel finds are either
very weak or non-existent. All that can be said with certainty is
that at least some of what has been named Tarsus E82 must fall to
the time of the E82 of Troy/Hlsarlik, Beycesultan, and Class A and B of Yortan. This lack of-contacts or exchange of goods need not
come as'a surprise; the excavators of Tarsus remark that "at no
other time did Cilicia come so close to developing an independent
indigenous character". 47 The contacts are mostly with Syria. Only
44, H. Goldman (1956) Excavations at Gözlli Kule Tarsus II p, 131, 45. M. 0. Mellink (1965) Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed.
R. W. Ehrich, p. 115 ff. 46. D. French, 1967, An, St. 17: 66. 47. H. Goldman, op. cit., p. 104.
116
by stretching-the material to its utmost limits can one point to
some related features in the pottery. One such vessel is the beak-
spouted jug which is more like the south-west version than that of the North-west. 48 A second and better parallel is the multiple
vessel in double, triple or quadruple combinations. It occurs on
a number of. Cilician sites with the Tarsus finds showing that its
first appearance on the plain is in the E82 period., and it continues to be made in the E83.49
As for the question of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian dates in
the West, this is a matter that rests first on the synchronisation
of Tarsus with the west Anatolian sites, and then of the Tarsus
sequence with the historical periods. Unfortunately, just as the
Tarsus-Troy-Beycesultan synchronisation is based on disputed grounds, the vital Cilician finds that have been recognised in a historical context are no more than one pot and a seal. The former
find is a reserved slipped jug of Tarsus EB2 (? ) and was found in
the tomb of Cheops at Giza. 50 That puts Tarsus E82 and EB2 of the
West contemporary with the IV Dynasty. This not too secure datum
can actually now be confirmed by the finds at Tell Chuera where the
E83 metallic ware pots with a diagnostic double-barrel lugs are well
represented in Troy II with the earliest examples probably not
occurring before Troy IId phase. 51 Some of the Troadic pots can
even be considered imports from Syria. Kuhns suggests the end of
the EB2 Tarsus falls before the end of the EDIII period which he
equates with the end of Troy II. But his reasoning of the west
Anatolian pottery at Tarsus as due to the intensification of the
commercial contacts with Syria does not at all explain the sudden-
48, H. Goldman., op. cit., Fig. 249, no. 211,213S'2149 218. 49. See Chapter 39 p. 50. M. 0. Mellink, op. cit., p. 111. According to Mellaart's his-
torical chronology IV Dynasty dates to 2700-2554 BC which is in broad agreement with the C14 dates of the west. I am indebted to Mr. Mellaart for this point.
51. H. Kühne (1976) Tell Chuera, p. 49.
117
and total appearance of the new elements in Cilicia. 52 The second
synchronous Tarsus find in relation to Egypt is a glazed steatite seal of the EB3 period and is suggested to date from the First Intermediate Period. 53 This historical date then falls into the
second half of the west Anatolian EB3 and defines the later parts of the Yortan Class C pottery and burials.
52. H. Kuhns (1976) Tell Chuera, p. 114,115. 53. M. 3. Mellink, op. cit. 2258 = 2052 BC are the dates for the
First Intermediate Period on Melleart's chronology. See also 0. Easton, 1976, An. St. 26: 163.
118
EBA IIIB EBA II EBA I
*0 4C2 O *O *O O
° In rn ö 0 ý
N r2 vi N Q ý-+ Ln
"
1-1 CD 1.. 8 F. 1 > > º-4 1--1 MX
-1 X º-1
X O a
1-ý t-1
ý ºr > ý+
> 04 F
> _ . ---> a c-
¢ .=
rn to c4 j2 m > N H ý >
x ui i r- r -1 ¢ O Y F'
Z
F- O m U to M0 1] LO mU O 1-1
.DU 1-1 -C 1-ý X J X
,'' X F-1 F-1
rr M
f1 M
1-1 FI
> 9-1
>>> MXX
1-1 >
1.. 1 ºr >> 1-1
1 F-1 1-1 F-1 1-1
Ln M 1-1 X r, )C 1-4 X
º-1 X 1.4 X
X X X X )C X XXi
X
Ü ý
! - W m
-- --- a - ---a Z a ý. ir ý O
>- -m 0 ir3 ý C
> H Co F- a .+ F+1 -º W
F- ...
E N --- --- ----- -ý
W CL
N U
r U
a ý L» W
F- ý O ý H
º-1 > >~ 1"4 1"L º-1 1-9
W ~
= J L. 7 p
ý W w
J
H J
W r V
Co m
O CL
0 +", 9-1 ! -1
1.. 1 >> 1-A º-1
F-1 >
h-1 6-1 h-1 0. -1
X 1-1
X M-1 rr X ºr
.., M Lr
W hr > F-1 ý
X ºd X
N W
These absolute points roughly indicate the C14 dates from Karatq,
TABLE 2 Aphrodisiac, and Ezero, mentioned in Chapter 4.
119
CHAPTER 5 THE YORTAN CULTURE OF WESTERN ANATOLIA
The excavations at Yortan had unfolded a large group of pre- historic pottery which today can be rated to a position no less
significant than that of Troy, Thermi or Poliochni. Since 1900
many more cemeteries, usually plundered for the satisfaction of the antiquity market, have yielded similar, often superior, pottery
showing that Yortan is not a local phenomenon. Thus, over the
years, a term "Yortan Culture" has come to be a familiar part of Bronze Age Anatolia, denoting an imperfectly recognised cultural
entity between the so-called Troy culture of the Troad and Boyce-
sultan of the South-west. Its somewhat enigmatic undertone is
partly a result of the improper publication of the Yortan cemetery
pottery and partly due to the clandestine recovery of most of the
finds. Hence, while in his highly constructive study of the region 3. Mellaart tried to draw the geographical limits and cultural implications of the material, D. French in a customary overcautious
manner preferred to drop the term altogether and suggested a differ-
ent classification. In this study it has been thought essential-to isolate the finds of Yortan from those of the so-called "Yortan
Culture" of a more general provenance. In this way the facts of the matter could be stated and reviewed with clarity. We propose
to continue to use the term "Yortan Culture" but only after submit-
ting an explicit definition of the evidence. To attain this end
it needs to be demonstrated that there is an area in western Anatolia
where a number of sites, both burials and settlements, contain pot- tery which is similar or identical to that of the Yortan cemetery.
Secondly, the pottery of Yortan need not be reported as being special to the burials but can also be found in the habitation deposits.
Thirdly, it is essential to draw the chronological limits of the
material. From the following account it will also become clear that
Yortan is neither the centre nor the most outstanding part of the
culture; but because it was at this site that the pottery first
became known, one may continue to use it as the type-site rather
than introduce further complications by new terminology.
120
The nearest and best known site is Babaköy near Bigadic. The
pottery illustrated in Fig. 87 was found in pithos burials iden- tical to those of Yortan. 1 The jars are very much in the form and decoration of Shape II, III and IV. One bowl, no. 4 (Fig. 87 found by Bittel, is similar to the Berlin bowls, Ber, no. 64,65 (Fig. 24 ). 2 Both the beak spouted, Shape VIII, and cutaway
spouted, Shape X. jugs plain or with white painted decoration, are also reported.
3 No. 5 (Fig. 87 ) is a large overlapping lid, Type (C) at Yortan, while other types of lids are also well represented. The tall jug no. 23 and a small jug or cup no. 4 appear quite dif- ferent in shape and fabric and may well be identified with the "C"
class pottery of the EB3 period. There is also J. R. Stewart's
observation that a sherd of Troy V type was found at the site. 4
The bowl on tripod feet, no. 68 (Fig. 87 ) strikes one as being
more like the Level XIII examples of Beycesultan5 than shape A. 17
of Troy I and II. 6
Although the Babaköy finds are not large enough to represent
all the types and shapes of, Yortan, it is still sufficiently repre-
sentative to allow both sites to be attributed to the same pottery
assemblage. To the west of Yortan are the disturbed sites of Soma
and Pergama. The available few pots Fig. 88 are again quite like the Yortan pottery of Class Ap though the tall-neck jug from
Soma., no. 34 ' could be of Class "B" date. More material is known
from the cemeteries of the Balikesir area which are exclusively
robbed and their contents divided up between the private and museum
1. K. Bittel., 1939, A. f 0.13: 1 ff; W. Orthmann., 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 1 ff; For further details see I. K. K6kten, 1949, Bell. 13: Lev. XCIV.
2. K. Bittel, op. cit. 3. Ibid., p. 9p 15. 4. J. R. Stewart (1948) Handbook to Nicholson Museum p. 81. 5. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart (1962 Beycesultan I. Fig. P. 43., no.
61 8., 9. 6. C. W. Biegen (1950) Troy I. Fig. 233, no. 35.537; Fig. 259;
Fig. 412, no. 25,, 26.
121
collections round the world. One exception to this sad and shameful
state of affairs is a brief excavation by E. Akurgal at a small
settlement mound of Ovabayindir near Degirmenderesi. 7
Only a small quantity of pottery was recovered, without an apparent stratigraphy, but it is very useful material in demonstrating the existence of at least some of the Yortan shapes on a settlement site of the area; the bowl with inverted rim is there, also in the variety with verti-
cally pierced carination, 8 there are high pedestal bases, lids of
Type (a) and fragments of jugs in Shape VII-VIII, or IX-X. The
team which had undertaken this research was also able to confirm the looting of a number of rich burials of the area.
9
Fig. 89-97, no. 1-36, , illustrate a number of vessels of
unknown provenance. They display features which are identical to
those of Yortan and some may even originate from that site. Others
such as jug no. "30 (Fig. 93. ) are products of a different centre but still belong to the same tradition of pot making. No. 33 (Fig.
95 ), said to be from Babaköy, is a most unusual vessel combining the characteristics of Shape III and IV in a kernos. On the other hand, Fig. 92,93,95, no. 23-29,34,35, -are vatious finds. which. äre again
undeniably related to the Yortan pottery but are generally known
to have come from the cemeteries of the Balikesir area. Further
examples are illustrated by S. Schiek and F. Fischer, 10 The bowls
no. 1-6 (Fig. -, 89 ) have already been examined;
11 they make a
significant addition to the repertoire of the Yortan bowls. Among
the jars, no. 21 (Fig. 91 ) with a tall collar neck and "wing"
7. E. Akurgal, 1958, Anatolia 3: 156 ff. 8. Ibid., Abb. 4. 9. In and outside the village of Ovabayindir, and at Mandraköy
(Yeniköy), I. K. Kökten9 op. cit., p. 817, reported one looted site at Boztepe (Ivrindir). One further such site is mentioned by D. French, 1969, An. St. 19: 45, Pamukcu.
10. S. Schiek and F. Fischer, 1965, FS 17: Taf. 25-27. 11. See Chapter 3y P-43,98
122
lugs is most like the Thermi jars in Town IV; 12, No. 22 (Fig. 91 )13
is almost a double of the Yortan jar no. 6 (Fig. 29); the tall,
plain jar,, no. 19 (Fig. 91 )., on tripod feet is in Shape III form,
except that the double lugs or handles on the upper section of the
body are not found at Yortan but occur on a jar of a different
shape at Beycesultan Level XIV, 14 Other small jars with rich in-
cised decoration and lustrous black burnishing are again'related to such Yortan jars as no. 5 and 6 of Shape IV, and on account of their much taller, flaring'bases and richer ornamentation one is
inclined to suggest a date towards the end of the EB2 period. 15
Two pyxides are in a'rounded shape resembling a nomad tent; they
make an interesting comparison with the Cycladic stone pyxis in
the appearance'of a house with a gabled roof; 16
no. 9 (Fig. 13 )
is more like those found in large numbers at Thermi I1? and Troy
I. 18 A large and coarse black jug, no. 31 (Fig. 94 ) is unique in reflecting the impression of a bird of prey in profile. Finally
there is the brilliant jug, no. 32 (Fig. 94 ) which in its superbly" balanced shape and a faultless, pitch black surface may well be
rated as the most successful product of the whole of the illustrated
material. The zigzag motif is incised and white filled, and it
very probably belongs to a period later than most of the Yortan
jugs of Shape VII-X. 19 Jugs of similar proportions could only be
sought out at Beycesultan in Level XIIa and Level XI. 20 Some fif-
teen dagger blades and eleven needles are also known to have been
12, W. Lamb (1936) Excavations at Thermi in Lesbos. Pl. X. no. 48, 336.
13. Now in Copenhagen. 14. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart, op. cit., Fig. P. 42s no. 2. 15. See Chapter 39 p. 16. P. Getz-Preziosi (1977) Art and Culture of the Cyclades, ad.
3. Thimme, P. 100 ff; Fig. 88, no. 6. 17. W. Lambs op. cit., Pl. XLs Type XIIIc. 18. C. W. Blegen, op, cit., Fig. 230, no. 35.468, no. 36.687,
no. 33.159; Fig. 244, no. 30. 19. See Chapter 2p p. 30 20. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart, op, cit., Fig. P. 48p no. 7; Fig.
P. 49s no. 9.
123
found in these Balikesir tombs. All, except no. 14, belong to the
well-known types of the EB2 period. No. 14 dagger shows a very
strong midrib section and is generally agreed to date later than
the E82 period. Similarly one needle, no. 25, with a bell-like
head is better put to a late date. 21
On the whole the Yortan products are inferior to those of Bali-
kesir, but that does not alter the fact that here are a number of
cemeteries which are situated within the same geographical zone and
physical environment, and display almost identical pottery types.
Furthermore this quite uniform pottery assemblage is not restricted
to the burials but can be successfully correlated with the survey
material from the nearby settlement mounds. The position of the
Ovabayindir settlement in relation to Yortan has already been out-
lined. 22 A survey material is often, strongly biased in favour of
the most common type of vessel from a settlement, the bowl, so that
only a part of, the Yortan repertoire can be identified on the mounds.
Nevertheless the parallels are, when located, rather good. The
most widely spread type is the carinated bowl in the so-called black
grey, red or brown Balikesir and Akhisar/Manisa wares. Some are
plain vessels, others are ornamented in matt white painting, and
quite similar to no. 1-7 (Fig. 23 ) of Yortan. To cite a few
examples: no. 26, Fig. B. from Kayi? lar23 is no. 7 (Fig. 23 ) at
Yortan; no. 14,150 Fig. S. from Pamukqu, or no. 19p 319 Fig. 8o
from Kayiglar are small bowls with painting on the rim; 24
no. 24,
260 Fig. 9. from Halitpaja I and III or no. 22, Fig. 109 from
Kayiglar, and no. 1.50 Fig. 119 from Hacirahmanli and Halitpaja II
have the more upright inverted rim and carination, 25
similar to the
Yortan bowl, no. 8 (Fig. 24 ) with or without the lug. Particularly
important is the bowl with pierced carination, no. 31, Fig. 9
21. S. Schiek and F. Fischer, op. cit., p. 163; see p. 39 22. D. French, 1969, An. St. 19: 77. 23. Ibid., p. 77-81. 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid.
124
(Kays? lar)-and no. 25s Fig. 12 (Ovaköy III). It occurs on some twelve sites of the area.
26 By contrast it is not among the cari-
nated bowls of Troy/Hisarlik, Thermi or Beycesultan, and it may well be a speciality of this area. Then, a number of spout fragments,
Fig. 20,27 from Ovaköy III, Pamakcu, Kayiglar and Hacirahmanll are
not classified but unmistakably belong to the Shape X jugs of Yortan. The body shards,, Fig. -22s
28 decorated with matt-white lines and chevrons must, except for no. 8. also belong to such ves-
sels. D. French is rather cautious in his recognition of the Yortan
pottery and classifies it as a sub-group under the "Black Burnished
Balikesir" pottery in the Troy II period. Other sub-groups of this
pottery are arranged according to ornamentation as plain, grooved/ incised, white painted, and plastic. He prefers to see Yortan as
a "cemetery" pottery not necessarily representing the "settlement"
pottery of the survey. But the present argument is that the Yortan
pottery is not restricted to the burials but is merely a selection from a larger assemblage and can therefore be shown to have a full
representation on the settlement sites, especially at better
known Troy/Hisarlik, Thermi and Beycesultan. We may well suspect, therefore, that when more sites are excavated the parallels between
the contents of the burials and the surrounding low mounds will be
even greater. French himself does not give a definition of the
Yortan pottery, but in ascribing it to several sites - Pamukcu,
Papköy, Sindirgi, Halitpaja II - he seems to use the incised shards
and lids of Type (a) Shape X as his criterion. 29 Ifs then the
proposed assessment and correlation of the Yortan pottery are
accepted, the definition of these cemeteries and mounds of the
Balikesir, Akhisar and Manisa areas as broadly comprising one and
the same pottery culture becomes inevitable and it may well be named
26, Ibid. Also D. French (1968) Anatolia and the Aegean in the Third Millenium 8C. Fig. 32. Unpublished. The sites are: Yortan, Ovabayindir, Kayi. lar, Ovakdy III9 Köselar, Naipli, Pamukcu, Pafak8y, Sindirgi, Kennez I. U ektepe, U pinar.
27. D. French, 1969, An. St. 19: 89. 28. Ibid. 29. Ibid., p. 642 Fig. 122 no. 32-37.
125
0
after its type-site, Yortan.
A full geographical definition of the Yortan Culture is not
yet possible and one can only offer a rough outline on the basis
of the presence and absence of the most outstanding characteristics
of the pottery. In the West, Bergama in the valley of the Bakirgay
(Kaikos) has already been mentioned, 30 In the same valley towards
the coast twelve sites are known from a small survey. 31 The
carinated bowl is again widespread, some rather characteristic
plain examples occurring at Yeni Yelde6irmen Tepe. 32 A variety
with a tubular lug is found at Tepe I in the Gumujova Deresi, 33
and
one with a lug below the carination at Üyücek Tepe near candarli, 34
But the occurrence at Tape by Ayazköy35 and at Üyücek Tepe of rim
and neck fragments that are in the flanged form of Shape III III
jars of Yortan is even more significant. Indeed, such equations
with Yortan are only natural, since all these sites are located
within the geography of the Gediz valley, and even Lesbos further
away off the Anatolian coast may be brought into the same pottery
provenance. Opposite Thermi, I. K. Kökten reported a brief survey
and small sounding at Kaymak Tape in the plain of Altinova. 36
Unfortunately the results are hardly published, depriving us of in-
valuable knowledge on a precise definition of the coast in between
the off-shore islands and the inland Yortan Culture.
At Bayrakli near izmir Troy I-II pottery is reported from the
lowest levels, 37 and one suspects at least some of it is more likely
30. See p. . Also S. Loeschcke, 1912, Ath_ Mitt. 37: 402. A. Conze (1912) Altetümer von Perpamon I. 2, p. 157,158. E. Boehringer and F. Kraus (1937) AltetUmer von Pergamon IX p. 100.
31.3. Oriehause, 1957, Ist. Mitt. 7: 76 ff. 32. Ibid., p. 849 Abb. 4. 33. Ibid., Abb. 1. 34. Ibid., Abb. 6. 35. Ibid., Abb. 3s no. 10,17; Abb. 6., no. 9. 36. I. K. Kokten, 1949, Bell. 13: 816.
.. 37. E. Akurgal (1950) Bayrakt. Kazisi. On Rapor, p. 54.
126
to be Yortan. At Sardis the prehistoric investigations on the shores
of Marmara G61U (Lake Gygean) revealed similar pottery at two loca-
tions, Ahlatli-Tepecik38 andýEski-Balikhane. 39 Both sites seem to
be pithos burial grounds without architectural remains. Once again the excavators compare the pottery with that of Troy/Hisarlik but
the illustrated examples, at least, are better'paralleled at Yortan,
though a certain degree of change in the details of shape is already
sensed. For example, a small jug40 belongs to the juglats, Shape
VIA but the overall form shows different elements. Across the sea the excavations of Chios, Emporio, are yet to be published. Various
deposits below the Mycenaean levels are ascribed to Troy I and III
and Kumtepe pottery. S. Hood speaks of a Troy I horizon41 and we
may again suspect that this pottery is actually directly linked with
the Yortan Culture of the opposite mainland. Heraion I on Samos,
on the other hand, though still within the sight of the North-west,
is oriented more towards the south-west of Beycesultan. 42 Thus, it
seems that the Gediz valley defines the immediate southern boundaries
of the Yortan pottery. Further South the Yortan elements may still be found, is, at Beycesultan, but intermingled with those of the
South-west. Judging by the Iasos finds, 43 the coast and the off-
shore islands occupied an intermediate position between the Aegean,
is, the Cyclades, and Anatolia.
Beyond these loosely defined southern and western geographical.
boundaries of the Yortan Culture which is effectively between the
line joining Edremit and Balikesir in the North and the Gediz
(Hermos) in the South, it becomes more difficult to assess the
38, D. G. Mitten and G. Yüdrümz 1974, Arch. 27s no. 1: 22 ff; D. G. Mitten, 1968, BASOR 191 Oct.: 7 ff.
39. D. G. Mitten and G. Yü r-Um, 1971, HSCP 75: 191 ft. 40. D. G. Mitten and C. YU4rüm., 1974, Arch. 270 no. 1: 25. 41. S. Hood (1965) Atti del VI Congresso Internationale delle
Scienze Preistoriche de Protostoriche. Sezione III0 p. 226,
42. S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart, op, cit., p. 181. 43.0. Levi, 1961-629 ASAA 23-24: 555-571; 1965-66p ASAA 27-28:
505-546.
127
meaning of any Yortan or other west Anatolian elements that may be
encountered, especially further west in the islands and Greece.
That there were contacts, peaceful or hostile, throughout the, Bronze
Age between the islands and the two mainlands on either side of the sea need not be doubted at all. The need for caution and moder-µ
ation comes where it is a question of interpreting. the evidence in
terms of the origins and development of the various cultures and inter-relations. On Crete the Late Neolithic is thought to contain
strong north-west Anatolian elements* 44 In the succeeding EB1 and
E82 periods Anatolian-like features are also detected but without a
plausible explanation to their meaning, especially when so little
is known of the south-west coast of Anatolia. Among these elements-,
foreign to the island's Neolithic, is the jug with a cutaway spout.
Although the shape of the body and the base is quite unlike those of
Yortan, the form of spout and the small knobs on either side of the
neck are truly identical to those of Yortan Shape X jugs in group 6.45 However, the painted decoration, dark-on-buff, is unknown any-
where outside Crete. In Greece and the Cyclades there are various
objects that can be recognised without doubt to belong to, the Early
Bronze Age of western Anatolia. 46 The tankard or dopes , as perhaps
one of the best known pottery shapes of the North-west occurs both
on the islands and mainland in the ECII and EHII. In the reverse
direction the sauceboat of the Cyclades and Lorna is at Thermi and
Troy/Hissarlik. But in viewing the entire cultural assemblages in
which these odd objects are found it seems wrong to maintain an
Anatolian influence across the sea, except perhaps for Macedonia.
One of the most typical pottery types of western Anatolia is the
44, J. D. S, Pendlebury (1939) The Archaeology of Crete, p. 41 ff; P. M. Warren (1973) Bronze Age Migrations in the Aegean, ed. R. A. Crossland and A. Birchall, p. 222 ff; J. 0. Evans, 1962-63, Archaeological Reports. p. 29; S. S. Weinberg (1965) Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ad. R. W. Ehrich, p. 301.
45. See Chapter 3l p. 46. For a list of objects in Greece see D. French (1968) Anatolia
and the Aegean, p. 129-132; C. Renfrew (1972) The-Emergence
of Civilisation, p. 196 ff.
128
jug with a beak or cutaway spout. The jug does appear in the Keros-
Syros culture of the Cyclades but it is quite unlike those of Yortan
or Troy/Hisarlik. Similarly there is little direct resemblance bet-
ween the jars, pyxides, multiple vessels of either region. It is
only in the idea of creating and using such types of vessels, whether it be for the tomb or in the house, that a broad cultural unity or familiarity may be suggested-for the Aegean zone.
47
In Anatolia, Aphrodisias and Karataq-Semayük are yet to be pub- lished. Probably their position in relation to Yortan and the
North-west will prove to be not too dissimilar to that of Beycesultan
of the same cultural province; here the local pottery is distinctly
different in displaying a greater percentage of the red burnished
wares and a more popular use of the fluted and ribbed ornamentation.
Some rather close Yortan parallels may, therefore, be explained in
terms of "contacts" between two neighbouring regions., rather than
due to cultural superiority or influence. As one moves further away
from the Gediz valley the trends and traces of Yortan become fewer
and more general. Thus Karatap, and perhaps even Aphrodisias, show less satisfactory parallels than Beycesultan. In the Burdur-Isparta
region - Senirce, 48 Mancarli Hüybk, Yassi Hüyuk, 49 etc. - the common
Yortan jugs, Shape VIII, X. continue to be found but more in the
tradition of Beycesultan and of Kusura further north. The latter
site is the type-site of the squat cup (Kusura cup) but it also has
some Shape VIII jugs without the fluted or ribbed drapings of the
area and more in the plain burnished style of the North-west. 50
The Afyon-Emirda6 pottery shows a high quality and a general like-
ness to the Yortan jugs, 51 but the proportions are quite different
and a reserved slip decoration applied in the form of a broad zig-
zag band is never found in the North-west. Two isolated occurrences
47, See Chapter 3p p. 85 48. H. A. Ormerod, 1911-120 BSA 18: 80 ff. 49.0. Mallaart, 1954, An. St. 4: 231,232. 50. W. Lamb, 1936, Archaeologia 86: Pl. VII, no. 8p 11. 51. Unpublished material, but it is on display in the Museum of
Anatolian Civilisations, Ankara.
129
of Yortan-like jugs are from Kula52 and Emet. 53 In the EskiVehir-
Ankara region the south-west elements are again strong; at Ahlatlibel, 54Polatli, 55
Karao6lan56 the grooved, fluted or ribbed decoration is very popular, often applied on the "Kusura cups" with
a high loop handle that can be plain twisted or cog-wheel type.
Such Yortan characteristics as the cutaway spouted jug, small jars
with collar neck, pyxides, lids, carinated bowl, or the tubular lugs,
are completely absent. In view of this wide inland spread of the
South-west pottery it is surprising to hear the excavator of Kara-
huyuk/Konya refer to many Troy parallels in the lowest levels of
the site. 57 Eagerly awaited publication of the material may solve
the puzzle. Bos-öjük and Demirci Hüyük finds are nearer to the
North-west though still remain outside the immediate sphere of the
Yortan Culture. Among the more obvious shapes, common to both
regions, is a zoomorphic vessel and depas from Bbs-öjük, 58 and a
small bird-shaped vessel and jugs from Demirci Huyük. 59 Further
north in the Iznik area the characteristic shape is a bowl with flaring or curving sides in the Yenijehir black topped ware*
60
There are some carinated bowls, tubular lugs, and white painted
sherds situated so close to the Troad and the Balikesir plain that
it is quite expected to find features common to both areas, but as
a cultural unit it probably belongs to that which is now best known
from Demirci Hüyük.
52. W. Lamb, 1931-32, BSA 37: 167, Pl. 23b; Beycesultan I. Fig. P. 22, no. 6 jug is restored according to this example. But the Kula vessel actually does not have front protrusion in the shape of an animal head, but the feature is more like
a small phallus. Two more, one on either side of the body,
are now restored. 53. ' J. L. Myres., 1903, RATOP 33: 373. 54. H. Z. Kopy, 1934, Ahlatlibel Hafriyati, TTAEO 2. 55. S. Lloyd and N. G6kce, 1951, An. St. 1: 45 ff. 56. R. 0. Arik, 1939, Bell. 3: 27 ff. 57. S. Alp, Karahuyuk Kazisi. Haberler. 1965, Bell. 29: 551;
1966, Bell. 30: 493; 1967, all. 31: 456. 58. A. Koerte, 1899, Ath. Mitt. 24: Taf. II. 59. M. Korfmann, 1979, Ist, Mitt. 29: Abb. 7. no. 7. 60. D. French, 1967, An. St. 17: 49 ff.
130
Perhaps one of the more interesting outcomes of this research has been the classification of Troy's position next to that of Yortan. Chapter 3 deals with the parallel finds in detail, and
one can see that in the selected repertoire of the Yortan pottery the Troy I-II shapes are often represented in much better makes,
and even superior products are known from the Balikesir area. Our
natural conclusion has, therefore, been that this area is the main
centre of the pottery, spreading as far-as the coast or even beyond.
The site at Yortan is a part of it, perhaps not a particularly pros-
perous one, and the small settlement at Hisarlik may well be an
extension or off-shoot of this cultural entity. If some local
"Troadic" features are in existence, they would have been acquired through the site's proximity to the sea and the, Thrace. One impli-
cation of this argument is to abandon the existence of a separate
coastal Troy I culture between the Gulf of Edremit and Izmir. Some
fifteen sites of the Yortan Culture area are known to have the
Kumtepe Ib type pottery, 61 but in the Troad only Kumtepe has yet
produced it. One may, therefore., imagine that this pottery marks the beginnings of the diffusion'from the inland sites towards the
coast and beyond. In the succeeding E82 or Troy I/K umtepe Ic phase the process is completed and there are many new sites. Besides the
mound of Hisarlik eleven sites are recognised with this phase. 62
Beyond Anatolia the North-west or Troy/Yortan elements continue
to be found in the 'Thrace and Balkans. At Dikili Tal the EB2 period
in Level 2-11 is readily recognised to be related and contemporary
with Troy E82 or Yortan pottery. 63 Even better parallels are from
61. D. French, 1961, An. St. 11: 104, Fig. 2. 62. See 3. M. Cook (1973) Bronze Age Migrations in the Aegean. ed.
R. A. Crossland and A. Birchall, p. 40. The sites are: Kara6ac Tapes coban Tepe, Kumtepe, Be§ik Burnu, Hanay Tape, Hantepe, Alaiindria Troas, Colönae, Kümbet, Kocabahce, ciflik Tepee Altin 01uk (near Pipazli).
63.3. Deshayes, 1972, Arch. 25. -no. 3: 199.
131
Karanovo VII 64 and Ezero B (Horizon VIII-II).
65 At the latter site
the tubular lugs pierced horizontally (Horizon XIII-II), an askos
shape jug (Horizon XI) and a jar with "wing" lugs (Horizon III) are
particularly significant. The jug with the slanting spout is found
in all levels, but the oblique cutting is never so pronounced as that of Yortan.
Finally one may attempt to give a definition of the chronology
of the culture. Besides Yortan many other sites are now known to
have a full Early Bronze Age sequence lasting into the Second Mil-
lennium BC. The last period of the Early Bronze Age, which at Yortan is represented by the Class C pottery, has a wide distribution
under the title of Red Wash or Slip ware of western Anatolia.
Obviously the term "Yortan Culture" cannot be applied to the entire Bronze Age sequence. There is too great a difference between the
earliest and latest wares, and at the present stage of research it
is quite impossible to see whether the E83 wares of Yortan were any different from those of Troy III-IV or Beycesultan E83. It iss
therefore, proposed, as already suspected by Bittel, 66 to limit the
term to the Class A and partly Class 8 pottery characterised by a highly burnished surface and ornamentation in white filled incision
or matt white painting. Toward the higher limits, its extension into the so-called Kumtepe Ib phase is not unthinkable. Indeed,
some of the Class A shapes may well start back in the EB19 or even
earlier in the L. Ch. 4 of Beycesultan.
One notes with interest that while the region was densely popu-
lated in the Bronze Age, the formation of the settlements is in
small and low mounds rarely exceeding ca. 100 m in diameter and
ca. 5m in height. This striking phenomenon in the settlement
64. V. Mikov, 1959, Arch. 12: 88 ff. 65. G. I. Georgievp N. J. Merpert, G. 0. Dimitrov (1979) Ezero.
Abb. 2040 171. 66. K. Bittels 1939s A. f 0.13: 20.
132
pattern of the North-west has long been noticed67 and can be ex-
plained as due to the extensive use of wood in architecture and the political circumstances of the age. But above all environmental factors such as the deforestation of the countryside and subsequent
soil erosion must also be considered. The importance of this latter
factor can actually now be observed in the formation of Demirci
Huyuk. 68 The full height of the habitation levels between the sum-
mit of the mound and the virgin soil is ca. 13.5 m but only 5.5 m of this accumulated occupation is actually above the present plain level, and the rest, that is the earlier Bronze Age and Chalcolithic
periods, are deep down, buried in the erosion soil. In other words
the present mounds of North-west Anatolia are usually only the sum-
mits of settlements which lie well below the plain level and if
excavated may well turn out to belong to much larger settlements.
In the historic centuries of the Second Millennium BC the region
appears to have remained on the peripheries of the Hittite kingdom
without achieving a major central power to meet the challenge from
Central Anatolia. 69 If a serious break at the end of the E82 period
of western Anatolia can be proved beyond doubt, it is highly likely
to be a very significant turning point in the prehistory of Anatolia
and the Aegean; it marks a change of direction in the cultural
development that may have lasted uninterrupted since the Late Chalco-
lithic period. This change could have brought about linguistic and
ethnic novelties, the Luwian speaking people being one such new
force in Anatolia. If soy then there remains little cause for
67. A survey of these views is given by T. Ozguc, 1944, Bell. 8: 55 ff.
68. M. Korfmann, 1978, An. St. 28: 17. 69. There is no secure identification of the area in the Hittite
geographical names. Lesbos-Lazpas is generally accepted; it is also quite certain that Arzawa occupied at least some parts of the Gediz/Hermos valley; Bakir gay/Kaikos is often iden- tified with Seha River. But the position of Ahhiyawa in the Trace and Troad, or in Mycenaean Greece, is yet to be settled.
133
supposing a direct link between the Second Millennium BC Luwians and the people of the Yortan Culture,
70 Indirectly a gradual inter-
mingling of the peoples, old and new, is not an unreasonable propo-
sition, a process of cultural and ethnic development that has often
characterised the peoples and cultures of the Anatolian peninsular.
It has been suggested that several pot marks on the pottery of the
Yortan Culture could be the beginnings of the hieroglyphic writing
of the Second and First ; flillennia BC. . 71 As the evidence stands it
is hard to be conclusive. With the exception of the Dorak-finds
there is hardly anything to speak for Egyptian influence under which
the Anatolian writing system could have developed. On the other
hand, no place outside Anatolia can be shown to have employed these
signs and therefore it'is more likely that Anatolia is the place of
evolution, perhaps the Egyptian influence or impulse arriving via
Crete. Since it is highly unlikely that the upheaval led to a
complete annihilation of the old stock, the so-called Luwian speak-
ing people must have absorbed at least certain strains of the people
who produced the pottery of Yortan or Beycesultan. But before a
direct link between the pot mark showing the figure of a human and
the Egyptian "ankh' and between the Luwian hieroglyphics and the
Yortan Culture, can be established, some more such hieroglyphic or
proto-hieroglyphic signs need to be found on the pottery of the
Early Bronze Age of north-west Anatolia.
70, H. The Bossert, 1960, Or. 29: 312 ff. 71. Ibid. See also Chapter 2, p. 36 . The next possible earliest
occurrence of the hieroglyphic writing in Anatolia is at Beycesultan, where a stamp seal was found below a Middle
_Bronze_Age_building in_LevelVI. See S.. Lloyd and 3. =Mellaart,
1958, An. St. 8: 97, P1. XXVI(a), and 3. Mellaart, 1971, CAH Is
part 2: 408.
134
CATALOGUE OF THE FINDS
All the pottery that could be examined is described briefly
below. Except for Babak5y and Soma/Gergama finds., all the
illustrations of the pottery are reduced to approximately half
life size. Only the spindle whorls are given without reduction.
Together with ample illustrations, it has been the author's aim to present the finds for critical study as a single body of exca-
vated material., and thus to some extent eliminate the necessity of
visiting all the main eight museums for a comprehensive knowledge
of Yortan. Most of the pottery of uncertain provenance could not
be examined by the author, who is indebted to Mr. 0. Mellaart for
readily putting his personal records of these finds at the disposal
of his student. Of the four schematic figurines illustrated by
M. Collignon in CRAI (1901), p. 810 ff. only two could be found,,
while the metal objects are today available only from K. Bittel's
publication in A. f 0.13 (1939) p. 1 ff. The following abbre-
viations are used:
Ber. no. W. Orthmann's publication of the Yortan pottery at Berlin. See lat. Mitt. 16 (1966): 1 ff.
B. M. British Museum, London.
Brussels Musses Royaux d'Art at d'Histoire (Cinquantenaire).
Cambridge The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.
Istanbul Istanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri, Istanbul.
Louvre Musse du Louvre, Paris.
Paris Inst. l'Institut d'Archeologie Orientale, Paris.
Sevre Musse National Ceramique, Sevre.
St. Ger. Chateau Saint-Germain-en-Lays.
135
CLASS A POTTERY OF YORTAN
All Class A pottery is hand-made without the use of the fast
wheel.
SHAPE I Bowls (Fig. 239 24; P1. III)
1- Coarse dark grey fabric and thick walls. Burnished, and
possibly slipped. Dark grey colour of the fabric and surface turns buff in places. The carinated upper section is in-
complete, where there might have been a lug or vertically
pierced point, as on no. 2 bowl. (Paris Inst. )
2- Fine, black/dark grey fabric. Inside and outside surface is
also black, and burnished. Rounded base where there is
incised cross. Without handle or lug; instead the carinated
upper section and inverted rim is vertically pierced in two
places forming a pair of string holes. (Brussels, inv.
A. 2656)
3- Fine black to brown fabric and surface colour. Burnished to
high shine. Similar to no. 2. One flat lug, vertically
pierced and set on the carination. (B. M., inv. 132414)
4- Fabric probably quite fine, rather thin walls. Slipped and burnished. Fired black without lighter oxidised patches. Flattened base. Below carination are a pair of vertically
set tubular lugs; one is missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 32)
5- Fine, grey fabric. Burnished inside and outside. On the
exterior, dark grey/black surface changes to red brown on one
patch. Possibly also slipped. Stands on a high pedestal
base pierced with four large holes. In between the point of
carination and rim lip is set one tubular lug, pierced
136
horizontally and decorated with six transverse incised lines.
(Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 31)
6- Coarse fabric, mostly black which is also the overall colour
of slipped and burnished surface. Some buff patches. About
half of pedestal base and part of the upper body are missing. Very highly set carinated section is more like thickened rim
with a flat and near horizontal top. A pair of small knobs
on the rim top are vertically pierced. (Louvre, inv. CA.
1220 83)
7- Grey fabric which becomes coarser towards base. Burnishing
is not obvious. Grey to light brown surface, perhaps coated
with thin slip. Thick walls are sharply carinated. Small,
well-defined, flattened base. One small handle is set below
carination. (louvre, inv. CA. 1220 )
8- Coarse fabric with large grain of mica quartz and other in-
clusions. Fired hard, grey to light brown colour. Without
slip or burnishing. Pitted exterior surface. Flattened
base,, rounded carination. Inverted rim has flat lip. One
small, unpierced lug below carination. (B. M., inv. 132413)
9- Dark grey fabric. Burnished inside and outside. Overall
surface colour is the same as fabric, in places turns to a lighter tone with some brown. Irregular shaping. Broken
horizontal handle is set on the point of carination. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 29)
10 - Where visible fabric is dark grey colour. Burnished outside,
has a yellow/brown complexion which may suggest slip coating.
Shape similar to no. 9p only body is deeper and more rounded
in profile. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 24)
Ber. no. 64 W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 18s 19.
Ber. no. 65 See Orthmann, op, cit.
137
SHAPE II Small jars with tall neck and on feet (Fig. 259 262 27;
P1. IV)
Overall shape is the same on all pieces. The rounded body
stands on three or four feet. At the widest contour are two knobs
and two vertically pierced lugs with one or two points, and round
or flat in section. The neck is tall and cylindrical, sometimes flaring to the rim which is flanged and flat-topped. Linear deco-
ration - parallel lines, zigzags, or bands of parallel lines filled
in with dots - is exclusively incised and often white filled. The
pattern is placed either horizontally on mid body in between knobs
and lugs, or perpendicularly from neck base to feet. The most
variant element between individual jars is the surface treatment
varying from black lustrous burnishing to a dull, light grey reflec- tion. No, 25 is the only red ware example of the Shape. The tex-
ture of the fabric is also liable to change. Everyjar is provided with a
pair_ of_string_holes,, one on either side of the neck, below flanged rim.
1- Black fabric, burnished. In comparison to rounded body, three
feet and cylindrical neck are rather short. (S. M., inv. 132418)
2- Fine,, dark to grey fabric. Remains of burnishing. Lugs are
missing. Carelessly executed incision; there is a single line with strokes arranged roughly into herring-bone pattern. (Paris Inst., no. 25)
3- Fabric is finer than usual. Light coffee brown in colour.
Surface not burnished, but coated with a black slip. Neck.
flares to a gently flanged rim. Two small knobs and one of tripod feet are missing. Faint incision. (Brussels, inv.
A. 2632, Yortan-Kelembe 10712)
4- Black/dark grey fabric, burnished. Rounded body stands crooked
on four feet. Horizontal mouth opening is not quite horizon-
tal., and everted rim slopes inwards. Lines in between knobs
and lugs are very faintly incised. (B. M., inv. 132419)
138
5- Probably quite fine fabric. Surface colour is mostly dull
dark grey with a light brown patch on one side. Smoothed.
The rim is more everted than flanged. White filled incision.
Inside remains of a red substance. (Sevres 10729 2)
6- Black/grey fabric, burnished. Two thick and pointed lugs
and two prominent knobs. Upper parts of neck are missing. Base of neck is ornamented with short strokes forming a zig-
zag line, dots and a single horizontal line. In the four
quarters of body which lugs and knobs divide ups three are
filled in with bands of dotted lines, and one has a running
zigzag with dots on either side. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 33)
7- Very fine dark grey/black fabric, fired to a metallic hard-
nesso and highly burnished. It is certainly the most deli-
cate example of its type. Stands on four small, pointed
feet. Most of neck is missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 )
8- Fine, black to grey fabric, burnished. Rather neat product
but does not stand upright on the elegant tripod feet. Band
of a single wavy line at base of neck, and three bands of
dots round the body. (Paris Inst., no. 19)
9- Dark grey fabric which breaks up'in flakes. Little burnished
surface is in a lighter tone in places. Half of the jar is
missing. Cylindrical neck swells in the middle. A band of
wavy lines in between the protrusions, and circles suspended
from a horizontal line at neck base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 56)
10 - Fine., grey fabric, burnished. Three of the four feet are
restored. Incised decoration consists of a zigzag line with
a row of dots on either side. At base of neck is a band of
two-parallel lines and-a row of data. (Brussels, inv. A. 2635)
11 - Grey fabric. Burnished, with brown patches. One of four feet
is restored. Rim is sharply everted and slopes outwards.
139
Deeply incised decoration of circles and an'interrupted double
zigzag band. (B. M., inv. 132422)
12 - Fine, dark grey fabric, burnished. Part of the upper neck is missing. A wide band of double zigzag in between pointed lugs and knobs. Neck base has the common motif of short
strokes suspended from a single horizontal line. (Brussels,
inv. A. 2628)
13 - Fine, dark grey fabric. Burnished surface varies between . this colour and a lighter tone. One of four feet is missing.
Cylindrical neck, partly missing at rim. A wide band of
running lozenge in between two flat lugs. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 84)
14 - Rather fine black to grey fabric, burnished. Two vertically
pierced horn-like lugs. A wide'band of double zigzag round
mid body and two parallel lines at base of neck. (Brussels,
inv. A. 2630)
15 - Fine, black fabric. ' Highly burnished surface turns to brown
colour on one side. One of the two pointed lugs is missing. White filling of the incised decoration - two opposing zig-
zags with a running lozenge in between - produces a good
contrast on the black surface. (B. M., inv. 132425)
16 - Fine, light grey fabric. Surface is in a dull colour of
grey. The main incised pattern on mid body consists of a
band of wedge-shaped punctures. Upper body is covered with
thin lines, perpendicular to a single horizontal line at neck
base. (Brussels, inv. A. 2653)
17 - Fine., black fabric, well burnished. One of three feet is
missing. Flat, double pointed lugs. Neck flares to rim in
a continuous curving rather than flanged profile. In between
knobs and lugs are curving triple bends. (Paris Inst., no. 20)
140
18 - Grey fabric. Burnished surface is light brown in places. Three of the knobs and-lugs are broken. Broad rim top slopes inwards. Each projection on mid body is encircled by a
double chevron, and there are short strokes in between feet
and mid body projections. (B. tl., inv. 132420)
19 - Very fine,, light grey fabric and burnished surface. Shaped
to perfection. Lugs, one of which is missing, are broad and
pointed. Incised decoration consists of double chevrons filled in with dots. There is a similar band on neck base.
Rather deep incision. (B. M., inv. 132372)
20 - Rather fine fabric, dirty brown in colour. But an inferior
product, poorly shaped and ornamented. Cylindrical neck
bulges in the middle. Three chevrons on the body, and a
discontinuous wavy line at neck base. Only one foot preserved. (Brussels., inv. P. G. 51.1.16, Yortan-Kelembe 10779)
21 - Fine, dark grey fabric. Burnished in similar colour, with
one third of jar showing a reddish brown tone. Two double
and two single chevrons. One of the two lugs and two of the
tripod feet are missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1.220 57)
22 - Black/grey fabric. Highly burnished surface is mostly damaged.
About half of jar is in a lighter tone of grey. Pairs of
circles are hung from a single horizontal line at base of
neck. Body is covered with eight chevrons forming a double
zigzag band. (B. M., inv. 132423)
23 - Fine dark grey fabric, with same colour burnished surface.
Rim is everted rather than flanged. A horizontal band at neck
base, and a double zigzag band round mid body. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 40)
24 - Very fine fabric, light brown to buff in colour. Very smooth
surface, possibly slipped. Deep incision in the form of a
141
continuous band of a wavy line and a row of dots. Short
strokes and a single horizontal line at neck base. (Brussels,
inv. P. G. 51.1.14)
25 - Rather fine, red orange colour fabric. Breaks reveal a grey core. This is the only red ware example of this shape. Otherwise shares similar details with the rest. Burnished,
a triple band forms a continuous zigzag on body. Strokes
and a horizontal line at neck base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 45)
26 - Coarser, light grey fabric. Surface is badly worn out and
covered. in white encrustation. A triple band round body and
a single incised line at neck base. Inside jar remains of'a
red substance. (Brussels, inv. A. 2397)
27 - Fine, light grey fabric. Burnished surface of same colour. Three feet. Deep incision consists of four triple chevrons
round body and a horizontal line with strokes at"neck base. (Brussels, inv. A. 2636)
28 - Half of neck is restored, thus obscuring details of fabric.
Surface colour is dark to light grey, burnished. Four inter-
secting triple chevrons round body,, and short lines perpen- dicular to a horizontal line at neck base. (Brussels, inv.
A. 2633j Yortan-Kelembe 10779)
29 - Coarser, grey fabric. Most of surface is worn out. One
third of jar is in light brown colour. Neck and rim profile differs from the rest; neck flares to rim which is not
everted but thickened with a flat top sloping inwards. Pierced
lugs and knobs are rather small. Ornamentation in between
projections consists of alternating triple chevron and
obliquely set triple zigzag band. (8. M. p'inv. 132421)
30 - Dark grey burnished with a light brown patch. Deep incised
lines are more like grooves. The unusual curvilinear motif
142
is repeated on either side of the body in between two pointed lugs. (Istanbul, inv. 3446)
31 - Fine, grey fabric and burnished surface. Some reddish patches. Neck and one of four feet are missing. A band`of dots and
short strokes round the body forms two broad chevrons. In
"between chevrons, on either side of body, are two short bands
descending perpendicularly from base of neck. Inside jar
traces of a red substance. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 70)
32 - Dark grey fabric. Burnished grey surface with brownish
patches. Two lugs are missing. Incised decoration consists
of two intersecting chevrons. In between and on either side
are two small triple triangles filled in with dots. (Louvre,
inv. CA. 1220 76)
33 - Grey fabric which breaks up in flakes. Of the three feet,
one remains. Deeply incised ornamentation is similar to
above; chevrons are filled in with dots, and two "W" motifs
are set in between chevrons, one on either side of upper body. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 40)
34 - Fine dark gray fabric. Surface is in poor state of"preser-
vation. One of tripod feet is missing. Two flat lugs and two small knobs. The incised pattern is arranged round knobs;
two bands of strokes, set in a zigzag pattern, form two chev-
rons above lugs. Below knobs are oblique lines and short bands as continuation of chevrons towards feet. (Brussels,
inv. A. 2653)
35 - Smallest jar of the shape. Fine, grey to brown fabric and
surface. Prominent flat lugs. Incision is rather faint.
Above each lug is a band of two parallel lines and dots. In
between lugs, *on either side of body, similar bands, also
perpendicular to neck base; one band consists of double zig-
zag. The second has a different motif. (Brussels,, inv. A. 2634)
143
36 - Very fine fabric and highly burnished. Surface colour is - mostly black. Some reddish patches. One, of four feet is
broken and missing. Ornamentation-consists of, four perpen- dicular bands of running lozenges, filled in with dots. Short
strokes and a single horizontal line at base of neck. (Istanbul, inv. 3451) 1
37 - Quite fine fabric. Burnished surface is in grey colour and a little darker than fabric. Four perpendicular herring-bone
motifs in between lugs and knobs. (Istanbul, inv. 3447)
38 - Coarser fabric. Burnished surface colour varies between black
and light brown. Largest jar of the shape. Rim is everted
rather than incised, and tripod feet are placed rather close to one another. Four pointed and vertically pierced lugs.
Round body is a zigzag band of dots and short lines., Small
lozenges are suspended from base of neck. (8. M. ß inv. 132424)
SHAPE III Jars with tall neck and on flattened base (Fig, 28-32;
P1. U)
Petrological analyses of a piece from jar of this shape gave the following result:
Black paste (jar neck) The matrix is birefringent in shades of orange and yellow and
contains shreds of muscovite and biotite mica. - Other inclusions are: Horneblende 0.10.2-0.5 mm; occasional
Quartz 0.1-0.3 mm on average. Some grains less
than 0.1 mm and subrounded. Scattered.
Plagioclase feldspar 0.3/0.4 mms subangular; occasional Pumice/volcanic glass 0.1-0.5 mm; scattered Haematite 0.1 mm-and less; scattered
144
Fine., black fabric., Slipped and burnished surface is in uni- form black colour with a slight coffee brown undertone. Poor
shaping, one of the four loop handles is missing. Four small knobs in between handles. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 11)
2- Small jar, more in the size of previous Shape. Fine black
fabric, and surface with some light brown patches. Rounded
base, and four loop handles. (B. M., inv. 132426)
3- Very fine, light grey fabric and surface colour which is uni- form. Tall flaring neck, and sharply everted rim with outward
sloping top. Loop handles tend to take a triangular shape. (B. M., inv. 132370)
4- Hard fired, fine fabric in dark grey. Surface is badly worn
out. Possibly it was coated in a reddish slip. The only
example of Shape where lugs or handles are replaced by solid
and elongated knobs. Also the rim or neck is not pierced for
lid attachment. (Sývre, inv. 10729'7)`
5- Very large jar. Fine grey to black fabric. Burnished pro- bably after slip coating. Poorly preserved surface. Four
loop handles and four knobs on upper body. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 14)
Bar, no, 40 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 12,13.
6- Fine dark grey fabric. Highly burnished. Oxidised patches on
surface of similar colour. Unique shape; a basket handle over
horizontal mouth opening. Four small handles round mid body.
Incised and white filled decoration. (B. M., inv. 132430)
7- Fine, dark grey to black fabric and surface. Burnished. Tall
neck flares to flanged rim. Body is slightly carinated and
stands on small flattened base. Four loop handles, four knobs.
Four triple chevrons in matt white painting. (B. M., inv. 132428)
145
Ber. no. 41 See W. Orthmann, on. cit.
8- Burnished surface is in shades of dark grey and reddish brown.
Tall, cylindrical neck. Four loop handles on mid body. Four
triple chevrons are largely faded out. (Istanbul, inv. 3438)
9- Burnished surface in shades of grey, yellow, and buff colours.
Flaring neck is set on a rather squat body with rounded base.
Badly cracked. Four loop handles. Matt white painted triple
chevrons are again barely visible. (Istanbul, inv. 3438(? ) )
10 - Rather fine grey fabric. Burnished surface is slipped in a darker shade of grey. A large patch is oxidised to light
orange colour. Four loop handles, and four knobs. Double
chevrons (four) are faded. One of the loop handles is
missing. Rounded base and gently flaring neck, (Istanbul,
inv. 3434)
11 - Dark grey to black jar. Burnished. The colour is uniform.,
except for one small patch in light brown. Rather large
body, slightly carinated. Stands on a flattened base. In
proportion, neck is short. One of four loop handles is
missing. Four matt white painted chevrons, each composed
of three wide lines. (B. M., inv. 13242? )
12 - Rather fine jar reflecting all the characteristics of its
type. Fine fabric, but with some larger grains. Slipped
and burnished surface colour varies from black to light
brown. Four loop handles and four knobs. Gently flaring
neck is set crooked on body. Four quadruple chevrons in
white/light grey colour painting. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 13)
13 - Intact jar. Black, well burnished surface turns light brown
to buff colour on one side. Tall, flaring neck and rounded base. Four loop handles and four knobs on mid body. Four
triple chevrons in faded matt white painting. (B. M.,
146
inv. 132429)
14 - Fine fabric, but rather thick walls. Burnished surface is
mostly greyish colour with a buff/yellow undertone. Tall,
cylindrical neck, small flattened base. Loop handles are
set on upper body. Four continuous quadruple chevrons in
matt white. (Istanbul, inv. 3435)
15 - Rather large jar, in fine and hard fired fabric. Two thirds
of surface is in light brown. The upper parts are in grey.
Large, globular body sits on slightly rounded base. Four
loop handles, four knobs, and four quadruple chevrons,
painted in white. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 12)
16 - Very fine, grey fabric. Smooth surface is in a light grey
and brown colour. Rounded body does not stand on base.
Four loop handles and four small knobs. (Sevres inv.
10729 4)
17 - Coarse but hard fired fabric, coated in red orange slip.
Some darker patches. It is a thickly made jar. Four loop
handles and four, flat knobs on upper body. (Sevres inv.
10729 5)
Ber. no. 38 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 101,11.
SHAPE IV Small jars with short neck or hole-mouth (fig. 32s 33;
Pl. VI)
1- Coarser fabric, fired hard and in uniform light grey. Surface
appears to be smoothed only. Two rounded lugs. Short collar
neck is pierced in two places for attaching lid. - Flattened
base. (B. rl., inv. 132415. )
Ber. no. 61 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 16j19.
147
Ber. no. 57 See W. Orthmanny op. cit., p. 16y 19.
2- Heavily encrusted in lime obscuring details of fabric and
surface. Fabric appears to be quite fine in light grey which is also the uniform surface colour. Four lugs, pierced ver- tically with large holes. Hole-mouth where there are also holes for attaching lid. Tripod feet are partly missing. Incised decoration is shallow, careless, and without white filling. Two triple chevrons, and two bands of dots. (St. Ger., inv. 58579)
3- Fine fabric., and highly burnished. Lower parts of body are
in light brown, and the upper parts, including short collar
neck in dark grey to black colour. Four large lugs pierced
vertically with large holes. Tripod feet. (B. M.., inv.
132416)
4- Intact jar. Probably quite fine fabric. Two-thirds of bur-
nished surface is dark grey and brown. Four vertically
pierced lugs. Stands on four feet. Incised chevrons. Inside
jar are traces of a red substance. (Louvre, inv., CA. 1220 39)
5- Fine dark grey fabric. Some burnishing. Globular body stands
on short pedestal base, flaring slightly. Four crescent shape lugs, vertically pierced. Incised decoration on the dark . surface is in the form of four perpendicular, triple running
lozenges on body and a horizontal hatched band on pedestal base. (B. M., inv. 132417)
Ber. no. 49 W. Orthmannq 1966: 16: 130 14.
6- One of the finest products of the collection. Very fine, grey
fabric is slipped and burnished to a black lustrous finish.
Four pointed lugs. Short neck and pedestal base flare. In-
cised and white filled ornamentation consists of two triple
lozenges alternating with two perpendicular running lozenges.
148 148
There is a single horizontal wavy line on pedestal base.
(Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 36)
SHAPE V Lids (Fig. 330 34; P1. VI)
Type (a)
Fabric, surface treatment, and incised ornamentation identical
to those of jars Shape II and IV. Except for no. 3. shape is convex in profile. A central knob serves as lid handle. Always two or
more holes on either side of central knob serve to attach lid to the
related jar.
1- Burnished exterior is black, and interior in grey colour. No
ornamentation. (B. M., inv. 132433)-
2- Coarse fabric. Light grey to light brown-colour. Without
decoration. (B. M.,, inv. 132431)
3- Coarse fabric. Black surface colour. Possibly burnished.
Four holes. Central knob-is off centre. (B. M.,, inv. 137439)
4- Rather fine, black to grey fabric. Well burnished surface in
similar dark colour. 2635)
Chipped on one side. (Brussels, inv.
5- Burnished surface black to light grey on outside, and reddish inside. (B. M., inv. 132434)
6- Highly burnished, black to gray surface. Central knob is
missing. Also broken round edges. (8. M., inv. 132440)
7- Burnished surface, light grey in colour. Central knob is
rather small. (B. M., inv. 132435)
149
- Burnished inside and outside, dark grey to light brown in
colour. (B. M., inv. 132436)
9 '- Rather fine dark grey fabric. ' Burnished inside and outside,
in a lighter tone of grey. (St. Ger., inv. 58579)
10 - Rather fine'fabrics and regular shaping,, -: Dull surface colour
varies-between grey and black, with some brown undertones.
(Brussels., "inv. A. 2658)
11 - Centre part'is poorly preserved. Fabric is greyish in colour.
Burnished outside in . leather brown, but grey inside.
(Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 73)
12 - Grey to black outside, reddish inside. Two rather large
holes. Central knob is mushroom shaped. (8. M., inv. 132437)
13 - Burnished, light grey colour, with a brown tone. Inside are traces of a red substance, similar to those found in some of
Shape III jars. (Brussels, inv. A. 2659)
14 - Burnished surface in black colour. Rather prominent convex
profile, almost conical. Two holes are obliquely pierced. (B. M., inv. 132438)
15 - Rather coarse product. Some burnishing inside and outside.
Dark grey in overall colour. Partly broken. (Brussels,
inv. 2633)
16 - Highly burnished inside and outside. Grey colour. (Louvre,
inv. CA. 1220 (40 bis) )
17 - Burnished, grey surface. Prominent central knob. (Louvre.,
inv. CA. 1220 64)
150
Type (b)
Fabric, surface treatment and decoration, as above. In shape,
more like a small, shallow cup with straight sides. On flat top,
four flat knobs round the central knob.
18 - Burnished inside and outside. Four holes, one in front of
each knob round the edge. Central knob is quite conical. (B. M., inv. 132441)
19 - Burnished, grey in colour. Traces of a red substance on interior. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 42)
Type (c)
20 - Irregularly shaped, coarse vessel. Fabric is dark grey. Outside surface mostly in light brown. Smooth surface is
bumpy, possibly coated in thin slip. The base, or top of
vessel is slightly convex, and round the edge are four
roughly shaped lugs, pierced vertically. On one side between
rim and lugs is a pair of holes pierced horizontally, which
corresponds to those of lug above. This is the only vessel
of its type at Yortan and probably belongs to a large jar
with tall neck. (Sevres inv. 10729 1)
SHAPE VI Juglets (Fig. 35; Pl. VII; Pl. XX, no. 12)
Smallest vessels of Yortan repertoire. Overall shape does not
vary; tripod feet are found an all pieces, except no. 13; body is
round or pear-shaped; spout is beak-like or cutaway. Fabric is
rather fine, probably slipped and burnished. Linear decoration is
exclusively incised and often white filled.
1- Fine black fabric, highly burnished. Feet are large and
151
cornered. One foot and part of handle restored. Body slightly
carinated below incised upper part. Small pouring channel of
neck is blocked by a corroded piece of metal. (B. M., inv.
132402)
2- Dark grey fabric. Burnished surface is similar colour. Feet,
loop handle and part of spout are missing. Three small knobs
round mid body. Angular neck. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 44)
3- Light brown and grey fabric. Burnished., One foot is missing.
Cutaway type spout. (B. M. 9 inv. 132373)
4- Light grey and brown fabric, and burnished surface. Feet are
partly broken. Beak spout. (Paris Inst., no. 22)
5- Dark grey to light brown fabric. Surface badly worn out.
One foot restored. Cutaway type spout. (B. M. 9 inv. 132401)
6- Black fabric, burnished to lustrous surface. But irregular
incision. Tip of spout is notched forming a double pointed
lip. (8. M. 9 inv. 132400)
7- Dark grey fabric. Black burnished surface. One foot and loop
handle are missing. Angular neck. Notched spout tip.
(Brussels, inv. A. 2645)
8- Dark grey to black fabric and burnished surface. Four perpen-
dicular strips of herring bone motif round body. Neck is
completely missing. (8. Pi., inv. 137502)
9- Grey fabric and surface colour. Uniform. Possibly burnished.
Three small knobs round mid body. Incised pattern is repeated
round each knob. Almost vertical beak spout. Loop handle is
more- prominent than on other juglets. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 34)
152
10 - Light grey fabric. Burnished surface changes from light to
darker grey. Only body remains intact. (Louvre, inv..
CA. 1220 77)
11 - Dark grey fabric and surface colour. One foot partially
restored. Beak spout with notched tip. Incised decoration
is more elaborate than on other juglets. (Brussels, inv.
A. 2643)
12 - Very fine, intact vessel. Fabric is in a light brown colour. Surface slipped and burnished to a lustrous red brown colour. Loop handle angular in section. Neatly executed, deep inci-
sion. White filled. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 7)
13 - Reddish brown fabric. Slipped and burnished in same colour. Rounded base without tripod feet. Spout tip broken., motif., four round upper body. - (Louvre., inv. CA. 1220 )
SHAPE VII Small jugs with obliquely cut spout (Fig. 36,9 37;
P1. VII)
Overall shape consists of round, globular or slightly carinated body, a loop handle, flat or round in section, and a, beak spout. Most pieces are burnished and some have slip coating. -Linear deco-
ration is exclusively in faded matt white painting.
1- Intact jug., -thickly made. Fabric probably quite fine. Highly
burnished surface in black colour. Vertical strokes on neck. Base cut flat but uneven. Thick loop handle. Horizontal mouth is slightly pitched to form a spout. (B. M., inv. 132378)
2- Fine fabric. Surface colour varies from black to light brown.
Some burnishing. Tall, beak spout. Neck bulges at base.
(B. M., inv. 132371)
153
3- Coarse fabric. Part of rim and neck in light-yellow, reddish
colour. Rest in black. Three small knobs round mid body.
(B. M.., inv. 132382)
4- Fine, black to grey fabric. Similar surface colour. Bur-
nished. Loop handle is missing. Broad neck and spout. (Louvre, inv. 1220 58)
5- Broken handle is restored, obscuring fabric. Probably quite fine. Burnished surface mostly black, some brown oxidised
parts. Carinated body on rounded base. (Brussels, inv.
A. 2647, Yortan-Kelembe 10712)
6- Rather fine fabric. Burnished surface in dark grey. Beak
spout and neck partly in light brown. Very well made overall
shape represents all the characteristics of the shape; round
body sits on rounded base, loop handle is flat in section.,
and tall beak spout has a bulging lower part. Additional is
a smaller, second loop handle on front of body. (Brussels,
inv. P. G. 51.1.4)
7- Very fine jug. Fine, dark grey fabric. Highly burnished
surface, yellow brown on lower parts of body, and black/dark
grey on upper body and neck. One loop handle, and three
smaller and angular handles round mid body. Most of spout is missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 59)
8- Fine fabric, break up in flakes. Surface colour in light
grey and brown. Three small knobs round mid-body. (Louvre,
inv. CA. 1220 68)
9- Very fine, hard fired fabric. Dull surface colour of grey.
Three., small knobs on upper body. (Brussels# inv. A. 2644,
Yortan-Kelembe 10712)
10 - Coarse'fabrics crumbles due to low firing temperature. Surface
a 154
colour, mostly dark grey, some brown. Very broad neck and
spout. The rim and parts of loop handle eroded. Three pairs
of knobs on mid body. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 89)
11 - Broken handle and spout restored. Fabric probably quite fine.
Highly burnished black surface. Three pairs of small knobs
on mid body. (Brussels, inv. A. 2649p Yortan-Kelembe 10779)
12 - Fine fabric. Light grey to brown surface colour. Plastic
decoration consists of three crescents round mid body.
(B. M., inv. 132385)
13 - Fine fabric. Surface colour grey to brown. Burnished.
Slightly carinated body. Three triple chevrons, and three
small knobs. (B. N., inv. 132391)
14 - Fine, hard fired fabric. Slipped and burnished black jug.
Twisted loop handle. A second, small handle on front body
and one of tripod feet are missing. Four double chevrons.
Two small knobs. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 )
15 - Coarse., dark grey/black fabric. Breaks easily. Same colour
surface. One third of jug is missing. Triple chevrons, and
pairs of small knobs. (Louvre, CA. 1220 81)
16 - Burnished, uniform black jug. Three pairs of triple chevrons,
faded in matt white colour. Three pairs of small knobs, one
in each chevron. (B. M., inv. 132393)
17 - Coarser fabric. Colour varies between black and light brown.
Stands"on pointed tripod feet. Body carinated. Three sets
of carelessly drawn double chevrons. Three pointed knobs.
(B. m., inv. 132399)
18 - Fine fabric, in dark grey colour. Surface is'coated in a
slip of light grey and pinkish colour. Three sets of triple
155
chevrons, hardly visible. Three pointed knobs on upper body. (Istanbul inv. 3408)
19 - Irregularly made, thick jug. Possibly slipped and burnished.
Surface colour is light brown and grey. Carelessly drawn
chevrons, largely faded out. Three pairs of small knobs.
Irregular rounded base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 85)
20 - Coarse, light brown fabric. Slip coating in red. Round
body. (8. M. ß inv. 132379)
21 - Coarse, dark grey fabric., Coated in a thin pinkish slip. Rather tall spout. Three knobs on upper body. (Brussels,
inv. A. 2648)
Ber. no. 8 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 3s 4.
SHAPE VIII Larger jugs with obliquely cut spout (Fig. 38-44;
Pl. VIII)
Commonest shape in the Yortan repertoire. Overall outline identical to previous Shape. Ornamentation is in plastic or chevron
motif in matt white painting. Fabric coarser than that of smaller jugs.
1- Coarse grey fabric. Lower body in grey colour. The rest
reddish brown. Slip coating is mostly eroded. Three small knobs. Loop handle and parts of body missing. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 55)
2- Medium fabric, fired hard. Surface colour in dark grey and
light brown. Four button-like knobs on upper body; two are
placed on front as a pair. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 86)
3- Fine fabric. Well burnished surface, mostly black. Slightly
carinated body on small flattened base. Three small knobs on
156
upper body. Well-made loop handle, flattish in section. Rather a successful product. (6. M. ß inv. 132369)
4- Fine black fabric. Burnished black surface. A brown patch
round loop handle. Three small knobs on body. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 26)
5- Quite fine, grey fabric. Dull surface colour in grey and buff. Flat loop handle is missing. (B. M., inv. 132380)
6- Well burnished surface, in black and reddish brown colour.
Round body sits tilted forward on small, flattened base.
Tall beak spout shows considerable bulging in middle. One
of the more striking examples of Shape. (Paris Inst., no. 73)
7- Rather coarse fabric. Possibly slipped, colour varying bet-
ween dark grey and light brown. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 92)
8- Rather coarse fabric, thick walls. Uneven surface. Dark
slip, well burnished. Loop handle broad, and quite angular in section. Flattened base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 23)
9- Fine, black fabric. Burnished surface of same colour. Triple
chevrons mostly washed out. Three button-like knobs, one below handle. Loop handle and part of spout missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 87) -
10 - Fine., dark grey fabric. Neatly produced jug, in perfect pro-
portions. Well burnished surface is black without oxidised
patches. Three triple chevrons, drawn in regular lines.
(Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 27)
11 - Slipped and burnished dark grey/black surface. Large, glo-
bular body on flattened base. Matt white painting of triple
chevrons is thickly applied. Four pointed, and slightly
157
angular knobs. (8. M. ß inv. 132392)
12 - Probably fine fabric, rather thin walls. Slipped and burnished
surface in black to light brown colour. Globular body
stands on small flattened base. Neck flares to form beak
spout. Most competent product. Three pairs of triple chev-
rons, with one small knob in each chevron. (Sevre,. inv.
10729 11)
13 - Coarse fabric. tends to crumble up. But a smooth surface finish due to slip coating and burnishing. Black/dark grey in colour. Twisted handle and tip of spout broken. Triple
chevrons, and three small knobs. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 21)
14 - Medium fabric. Probably slipped and burnished. Overall
colour is dark grey, but with a red/brown lower part. Faded
triple chevrons. Four small knobs, one on base of loop
handle. (Istanbul, inv. 3398)
15 -A perfect example of Shape. Well fired, fine fabric. Slipped
and burnished surface, black in two thirds. Round body stands
crooked on small flattened base. Tall beak spout, flanged
near rim. There are five quadruple chevrons, one at front,
and a pair on either side. (Sevres inv. 10729 9)
16 - Medium coarse fabric. Slipped and burnished. Colour varies between-black and light brown. Three pairs of triple chev-
rons, and three pairs of knobs inside chevrons. Flattened
base. (Istanbul, inv. 3399)
17 - Rather coarse fabric. Coated in slip and burnished. Two
thirds are in black. Chipped rim. Broad handle, and slightly flattened base. Triple chevrons, matt white paint is thickly
applied. Three small knobs inside chevrons. (Istanbul,
inv. 3400)
158
18" - Medium fabric, low fired and breaks easily. Slipped and bur-
nished surface in black colour. Some light brown patches.
Three quadruple chevrons where matt white paint is well pre-
served and stands in striking contrast to darker background.
Spout is missing, and body badly cracked. (Paris Inst.,
no. )
19 - Black,, burnished surface. Slightly carinated body, small flattened base. Loop handle angular in section. Three
triple chevrons in faded matt white painting. Three crescents.,
one in each chevron. (Paris Inst., no. 15)
20 - Coarse fabric, red brown. Red/orange slip coating. Some
grey patches. Poor shaping. Cracked front body could have,
been caused by faulty firing conditions. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 65)
21 - Coarse, light brown fabric. Red slip coating, some black
patches. Three knobs. Loop handle is missing.
inv. 132383)
(8. m.,
22 - Coarse, light brown fabric. Poorly preserved surface. Appears to have red/orange colour slip. coating. Some black
patches. Three pairs of small knobs on upper body. Handle
and part of spout missing. (B. M., inv. 132384)
23 - Coarse, reddish fabric with grey core. Thin red/orange slip
coating, possibly not burnished. Three pairs of horn-like
knobs round mid body. Neck and handle are completely missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 96)
24 - Coarse, reddish fabric. Similar colour slip coating, but
with black patches. Rather rough product. Originally had
quadruple chevrons, now barely visible. Very broad loop
handle, rounded base. Spout is badly chipped. (Istanbul,
inv. 3404)
159
25 - Coarse, red-brown fabric. Surface coated with a thick red
orange slip and burnished. Despite unrefined fabric., walls
are thin, and overall shape in good proportions. Jug sits tilted forward on a small flattened base. Broad, flat handle. Three triple chevrons. (B. M., inv. 132389)
Red/brown paste
Birefringent from orange to yellow,, Horneblende - 0.2 mm;., infrequent
Quartz 1 mm-0.5 mm angular, subangular
and sub-rounded; frequent
Polycrystalline quartz- 0.2 mm;. -infrequent Feldspar 0.5-0.1 mm sub-rounded; occasional Pumice/volcanic glass 0.5-0.1, with a mean of 0.3 mm;
frequent
Haematite 0.5-0.1 mm; scattered
26 - Medium fabric, but rather thin walls and fired hard. A red- dish, dark brown slip. One side is largely restored. Rather
squat body which does not stand on rounded base. Very broad
neck and spout. Triple chevrons with a pair of prominent knobs in each chevron. Overall shape is similar to "Kusura
Cup" of south-west Anatolia. (St. Ger., inv. 58567)
SHAPE IX Small jugs with cutaway spout (Fig. 45p 46p 47;
P1. IX;. XX., no. 3.16)
Fabric texture varies between fine and coarse. Often mottled
colouring due to uneven firing conditions. In overall shape the,
characteristic feature found on every jug is the cutaway type spout. Round or globular body has a small flattened base or rarely tripod
feet. Ornamentation is in plastic and matt white painting.
7- Quite fine fabric, thin walls. Dark grey surface with reddish
patches. Possibly burnished. (Brussels, inv. A. 2646,4
160
Yortan-Kelembe 10779)
2- Intact jug. Surface is a light grey, thin slip. It does not
stand up on round base. Cutaway neck pressed on either side forming a bifoil-like spout. Loop handle and upper body
covered with plastic ribs. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 6)
3- Intact jug. Slipped and burnished in uniform black lustrous
colour. Squat body, very tall spout with everted rim. A
faultless product. (Paris Inst., no. 10)
4- Coarse jug. Thin slip coating. Surface colour is a mixture
of grey, reddish and dirty light brown. Shaping is also
rather rough. (Istanbul, inv. 3423)
5- Rather fine, uniform black jug. Body slightly carinated.
Angular handle. Lip of rim is flat and everted. Four oval
knobs at point of carination. (Istanbul, inv. 3424)
6- Thickly made jug. Slipped and burnished. Surface colour
varies from dark grey to light brown. Flat lip of rim, everted.
Three knobs on upper body. (Istanbul, inv. 3414)
7- Medium fabric. Burnished surface in black and red brown.
Largel'globular body on tripod feet. End of spout missing. (Istanbul, inv. 3429)
B- Fine fabric, thin walls. In uniform dark grey colour. Round
body stands on tripod feet. One foot and loop handle are
lost. Three pairs of horn-like projections round mid-body.
Along cutaway part of the spout rim sharply everted and flat
topped sloping inward. Partly restored. (St. Ger., inv. 58..... )
9- Thickly made, fine jug. Surface colour is in black and light
brown. Cutaway spout with everted rim. Three sets of triple
chevrons. Four plastic bars are placed across chevrons.
161
Tripod feet are partly restored. (St. Gar., inv. 58591)
10 - Very fine jug. Thin walls. Probably slipped and burnished.
Surface colour mostly black with a large patch in lighter
brown and yellow. Rim everted at top of cutaway spout. Flat
lip of rim. Three very regularly drawn quadruple chevrons. One small knob on either side of spout. (Istanbul, inv. 3410)
11 - Coarse jug,, grey fabric with large grains of mica and other inclusions. A blackish surface colour with red brown under- tones. Roughly shaped. Most of spout missing. Chevrons
drawn irregularly, more like paint running down over the sur-
face. Three pairs of small knobs. At base of neck on front
is a small plastic feature. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 22)
12 - Fine, dark grey fabric. Surface colour is black in two thirds.
A large patch in light brown. Slightly carinated body. Broken
handle. Tip of spout is missing. Three sets of triple chev-
rons, and three small knobs. (St. Ger., inv. 58528)
13 - Neatly produced shape. But surface colour, perhaps in a thin
slip coating, is confused. Dark grey and light brown where the painted chevrons hardly stand out. Small flattened base,
off centre. Five quadruple chevrons intersecting one another
at mid body. Three pairs of small knobs, and a pendant-like
feature at neck base. Spout badly cracked. (B. M., inv.
132394)
14 - Medium fabric. Slipped and burnished surface mostly black.
Handle and its base oxidised to light brown. Very well made
jug. Upper part of spout is missing. Everted rim with knobs
on either side. Ornamentation on body consists of three quad-
ruple chevrons, four hatched lozenges, and four plastic cres-
cents, one on tip of each chevron. (Istanbul, inv. 3420)
15 - Rather small jug, but fabric coarse and grey in colour.
162
Surface is slipped and burnished in red brown. Two small knobs on spout, one on either side. Four crescents on body
and a small knob on front of body. The loop handle and one crescent are missing. The place of the lost crescent is
marked by an incised line. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 17)
Ber. no. 22 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 6p 9.
16 - Very fine jug, with perfect finish. Coated with ,a thick red brown slip, and highly burnished. A small plastic feature
at base of neck on front. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 9)
17 - Fine fabric ip grey. Surface in red/orange slip, and bur-
nished. Rather large and round body that does not stand up
on round base. Rim is sharply everted. Flat rim line. A
faint incised line round neck base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 48)
SHAPE X Larger jugs with cutaway spout (Fig. 48-64; P1. X;
P1. XX, no. 19)
Very fine and very coarse fabric rare. Mottled surface colour,
often slipped and burnished. Shape identified by the cutaway spout. A single loop handle, oval or angular in section. Body is round or
globular and stands on rounded base or rarely on tripod feet.
1- Rather thick and heavy jug. In dull dark grey. colour with
light brown patches. Smoothed or burnished. Relatively short
spout. Knobs on spout, and three plastic crescents on upper
body. There is an elongated'knob on front at base of neck. (8. M. ß inv. 132367)
2- Well burnished surface, mostly in dark grey colour. Some red-
dish parts near handle. Rather beak-like spout, thick loop
handle. Three sets of triple chevrons drawn with precision. (Brussels, inv. A. 2651)
163
3- Fine., hard fired fabric. Well burnished surface, half in black
and half in brown. Pear shaped body, topped with a rather
narrow and short spout, partly missing. Knobs on spout below
rim. Four plastic crescents on mid body. On front upper body'are three flat knobs suspended from base of neck. (8. N. ß inv. 13236)
4- Rather large jug. Fine, dark grey fabric. Surface slipped
and burnished'in black colour with some light and reddish brown.
Vertical strips indicate application of slip by brush or cloth.
Spout mostly'missing, knobs on either side. Very large. body
is slightly carinated in the middle. Three painted knobs.
(Istanbul, inv. 3416)
5- Large jug, -and quite intact. Well burnished, mostly in dark
grey. Spout is rather short, and the pouring channel rather
narrow. Knobs on, spout and body. (Brussels, inv. A. 3408)
6- Medium fabric, possibly slipped and burnished. Mostly in dark
grey, mixing with buff colour. Chevrons are mostly faded out
and hardly visible on lighter background. Matt white paint
(lime) is for some reason grey and actually darker than the
surface of the pot. (B. M. p inv. 132368)
7- Coarse fabric but fired hard. Surface in dark grey colour,
quite uniform. Cutaway spout shows a distinctive profile.
Three sets of triple chevrons, and three knobs. (St. Ger.,
inv.
8- Large jug in dark grey colour. One side has a brown patch.
Lime encrustation obscures details. Large, globular body on
rounded base. Short spout has everted rim. Below rim are two
knobs but elaborated to resemble "earrings"; each consisting
of an obliquely set,, elongated knob with a round disc stuck to
it. Neck base is ornamented with a "necklace" in the form of
seventeen conical knobs. Below on upper body are three broad,
164
divided crescents. (St. Ger., inv. 58563)
9- Fine fabric. Burnished surface in dark grey. But on either
side of body large areas in reddish brown. Rounded and large
body is covered by two quadruple chevrons in faded matt white. Spout broken. A pot mark impressed into handle base.
(S. M., inv. 132390)
10 - Slipped and burnished black jug, with a coffee brown under- tone. Thin walls. Rim of cutaway spout is everted. Small
knobs on spout are on either side and placed below rim.
Faded triple chevrons on body and also plastic crescents,,
three altogether. (Istanbul, inv. 3401)
11 - Rather fine jug. Fabric is fine, and walls very thin. Slipped
and burnished. Mostly black with reddish brown patches. Over
very smooth surface three sets of quadruple chevrons are
hardly visible. (Istanbul, inv. 3418)
12 - Medium, grey fabric, fired hard. Thin walls. Burnished black
surface, turns reddish brown near-handle. Tripod feet partly
broken. Base of loop handle is "V" shape. Two knobs on spout
near handle. Four pairs of plastic crescents on-upper body.
Originally it had the chevron motif in matt white, now almost
completely erased. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 17)
13 - Medium grey fabric. Burnished black surface mottled with red
orange. The loop handle and part of spout are missing. Six
chevrons, either triple or quadruple. There is one prominent
knob in each chevron. A small plastic motif at base of neck. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 97)
14 - Uncleaned surface, badly eroded, conceals technical details.
Probably slipped and burnished in black colour. It is a tall
jug standing upright on flattened base. Everted rim with
flat lip. In circumference neck is not round but angular.
165
Two pointed knobs on spout, one on either side and below
everted rim. On upper body are four pairs of sweeping cres- cents, also slipped and burnished. (St. Car., inv. 58564)
15 - Slipped and burnished, mostly in black colour. Rim of cut-
away spout everted. On upper, globular body are four flat
knobs, each with a slightly sunken centre. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 15)
16 - Surface colour in dull black to reddish brown. Below handle
body is carinated which becomes rounded towards front. Rather
large and tall spout, flaring and with everted rim. Two knobs
on spout near handle, six more on upper body. A short plastic line at neck base. (Brussels, inv. A. 3409)
17 - Well burnished black surface. Typically tip of spout is in
light brown. Overall shaping most competent; tall cutaway
spout flares in upper parts, everted rim. Restored at neck base. On body are three pairs of crescents. (Brussels, inv.
A. 2638)
18 - Tall jug with fine black fabric and burnished surface. Some
reddish brown patches. Everted rim, flat lip that slopes
outward. Body slightly carinated. Three small crescents in
plastic. (B. M., inv. 132387)
19 - Fine grey fabric, hard fired. Burnished black surface mottled in light brown and red. Rather well made product. Tall cut-
away spout with everted rim. Knobs on either side. Six
quadruple chevrons are evenly drawn, each enclosing one pro-
minent knob. (Paris Inst., no. 16)
20 - Rather successful product. Burnished, black in colour. Small
hole on one side near handle. Three sets of quadruple or triple chevrons. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 91)
166
21 - Medium fabric. Surface colour black on upper and light dirty
brown on lower parts of body. Top of spout is missing. Two
crescents on either side of spout under everted rim. Globular
body ornamented with eight triple chevrons and four plastic
crescents. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 18)
22 - Burnished surface mostly in black. Tall cutaway spout, form-
ing a broad, shallow pouring channel. Everted rim. Slightly
carinated body covered with intersecting quadruple chevrons. Towards lower parts of body, lines of chevrons break away
from the rigid parallel motif and make sweeping curves. Four
pointed knobs, one in each chevron. (6. M. ß inv. 132396)
23 - Burnished black jugs. Handle and some other patches oxidised
in light colour. Cutaway spout is tall and broad as previous
jug, no. 22. Three sets of holes on either side of a break
in mid spout indicates broken and repaired at the time of its
production and use. Three pairs of triple chevrons, three
pairs of small knobs. Two oval knobs on spout below everted
rim. (B. M., inv. 132395)
24 - Broken and restored. Well burnished black jug. Tall, shallow
cutaway spout, as-above. Body in pear shape with a flat loop
handle and flattened base. Three sets of quadruple chevrons
and a small plastic feature on front at neck base. (St. Gar.,
inv.
25 - Very fine jug. Broken spout restored, obscuring fabric.
Slipped and highly burnished. Mostly black. Angular loop
handle and below in light brown. Tall, elegant spout and
balloon-like round body on tripod feet with corners. Two
elongated knobs on spout below rim and near handle. One
small knob on front of body. Four triple chevrons. (Istanbul, inv. 3428)
26 - Fine jug. Surface details obscured by lime encrustation.
167
Appearsýto be mostly in black colour with red brown and yellow
mottling. Loop handle and part of spout missing. Everted
rim. Pear shaped body with a small flattened base. Two
plastic strips with transverse grooves on spout below rim. On body are four pairs of sweeping crescents in low relief. A small plastic feature, "pendant". on neck base in front of
pot. (St. Ger., inv. 58541)
27 - Dull surface colour is grey with red patches. As above top
of cutaway spout is horizontal rather than slanting. Everted
rim. Spout narrows down towards neck base. Five pointed
knobs round mid body. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 93)
28 - Burnished surface, coated with red slip. Some reduced patches
in dark grey. Top of spout slants towards front of the pot.
Globular body'does not stand on rounded base. Three sets of
horizontal bars on upper body. (St. Ger., inv. 58565)
29 - Fine fabric, fired hard in black colour. Similar surface
colour. Deep pouring spout with everted rim which becomes
flanged in middle part of the cutaway section. Flat rim lip.
Loop handle is quite angular in section. Globular body on
distinctly flat base. Two knobs on spout, below rim.. Also
in plastic are three sets of double chevrons inside white
painted quadruple chevrons. At the back, on either side of
the handle, two perpendicular running double lozenges, one on
either side of handle. (B. M., inv. 132397)
30 - Large jug, surface in black/dark grey colour and well burnished.
Two knobs, on spout, are on either side and below rim. Glo-
bular body on round base is ornamented with four quadruple
chevrons in faded matt white painting. (St. Ger., inv. 58532)
31 - Dark grey fabric and surface colour, covered in. lime encrus-
tation. Brown in parts. Unusual loop handle, made up of
thin strips of clay stuck together. Broken and parts missing.
168
Also one of tripod feet restored. Tall, straight spout has
two short plastic protrusions, one on either side. Pear
shaped body ornamented with four quadruple chevrons and six knobs. (St. Ger., inv. 58560)
32 - Fine fabric in dark grey colour. Surface slipped and bur-
nished in black. Tall cutaway spout, everted rim with flat
top. Flat, strap like handle. Carinated body where on upper
half are plastic lines, a pair on either side and three on
front. This and the following jugs no. 33,34 differ from
the rest in having a taller spout, sharper details and markedly
carinated body. (Istanbul, inv. 3413)
33 - Thickly made pot. Slipped surface in dark grey with a , red-
dish undertone. Fine lines on surface indicate application
of slip by brush or cloth. Rather broad and shallow-pouring
spout. Everted rim. Handle flat in section, and at base a
plastic bar extending to the width of the handle. Markedly
flat base with body-that reaches the widest contour in the
upper half. Three sets of triple chevrons mostly faded out.
(Istanbul, inv. 3412)
34 - Burnished jug, mostly in black or dark grey colour. Rather
thick walls. Striking form of cutaway spout, marked by a
sharply everted rim with flat top. Body carinated in the
middle, small flat base. On the upper half are three sets
of triple plastic lines, perpendicular to neck base.
(Istanbul, inv. 3415)
169
SHAPE XI Jugs with flanged rim and side spout (Fig. 65; Pl. XI)
1 Intact., small jug. Surface colour in dark grey and light
brown. Possibly had slip coating. On one side of body a
side spout. Single loop handle. Slanting spout with a
characteristic flanged rim. (B. M., inv. 132398)
2- Fabric finer than above, but liable to break up in flakes.
Burnished surface in grey and light brown colour. One side
spout on body, four plastic crescents on upper body and one knob on front. Most of slanting spout and flanged rim missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 )
3- Similar-to above. Only there is a double side spout, and six
knobs; one is on the front, a pair below loop handle within
the crescents, one at handle base, and the remaining two on
either side of body. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 5)
4- Thick, sturdy pot. Slipped and burnished surface in dark grey.
Broad, flattened base. Spout and rim as above. Double side
spout, one is missing where a small hole pierced into body of
pot. (St. Ger., inv. 585... )
5- Rather fine jug, slip coating in red orange colour. Body
slightly carinated and does not stand on rounded base. Slant-
ing spout similar to above but rim everted rather than flanged.
Two loop handles, smaller one placed on front body. One side
spout. (St. Ger., inv. 58575)
6- Rather fine jug. Breaks reveal dark brown and gray fabric.
Surface in dark red slip. Thin, hard fired walls. Globular
body which does not stand on rounded base. Part of slanting
spout and flanged rim missing. Single side spout set on body
in an upright angle. (St. Ger., inv. 58547)
170
SHAPE XII' Larger jugs with flanged rim (Fig. 66-69; Pl. XI;
Pl. XXI, no. 3.7)
1- Burnished surface in black and grey. Slanting spout with a flanged rim. Thin oval mouth opening is broader near tip of
spout and narrows down towards handle. Large body ornamented
with three plastic crescents. Although lacking in striking
qualities, the pot is the product of careful and competent
craftsmanship. (Brussels, inv. A. 2639)
2- Rather fine jug. Slipped and burnished in black. Elegant,,
angular loop handle, slanting spout with flanged rim. Pear
shaped body ornamented with plastic chevrons in triple groups. Three sets are round mid body and the third at handle base.
Also small "pendant" feature at neck base. (Louvre., CA. 1220 8)
3- By far the most successful and striking product of the site.
Black to light yellow brown slip is burnished to a lustrous
reflection. Very large, squat body topped by tall cylindrical
neck with slanting spout and flanged rim. Elegant loop handle,
rather "metallic" in triangular profile. Ornamentation is
plastic; four sets of curving lines; the two front sets are
composed of four lines each, while those near the handle are triple. A smaller double chevron at handle base. Then on
base of neck a "pendant" like feature suspended from a raised
line round base. At the back, below handle, is a "knot"
attached-to this line. (B. M., inv. 132388)
4- Fine jug, slipped and burnished. One half is in black, the
rest in reddish brown. End of slanting spout and flanged rim
is missing. Ornamentation on body in matt white painted chev-
rons. Three quadruple chevrons, and a fourth triple set
at handle base. Small "pendant" feature at neck base.
(Istanbul, inv. 3417)
5- Similar to above jug. More rounded body and lighter grey
171
surface colour. Triple chevrons in matt white painting hardly
visible. (Istanbul, inv. 3397)
6- Fine, large jug. Slipped and burnished surface in black. Only at the tip of spout, oxidised patch of light brown, buff
colour. Quadruple chevrons in matt white painting. Its pro- venance, as Yortan is not-certain. (Istanbul, inv. 7656)
7- Coarse fabric but fired hard. Slipped and burnished in red brown. Some reduced patches of grey. Plastic decoration in
the form of three sets of triple lines on--upper body. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 2)
SHAPE XIII Tankards (Fig. 70; Pl. XII)
1- Very coarse grey to coffee brown fabric. Hand made, thick
walls. Dull grey surface, smoothed or burnished. Pear shaped body with neck flaring to horizontal mouth. Two loop handles
flat in section. Broad, flattened base. (8.11., inv. 132446)
2- Similar fabric and surface details. It varies in the body
shape with round base, and shorter neck. (B. M., inv. 132445)
3- Similar in the general outline. Also hand made. But fabric
is very fine and light orange in colour. Smooth surface
coated in red brown slip. Squat body on round base. Two
handles also flat in section. (Louvre, CA. 1220 53)
SHAPE XIV Bird-shaped vessels. (Fig. 719 722 73; Pl. XII)
1- Fine., grey fabric. Surface slipped and well burnished in
black. Slanting spout partly missing. Flanged rim. Body
ornamented with nine plastic ribs, one on front extending from neck base to front feet. The remaining eight on sides,
172
in groups of four. Some of the ribs are missing. There is
one projection at handle base representing tail of the bird.
Tripod feet partly broken. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 10)
2- Burnished surface in black and light brown. Cutaway spout with flanged rim and flat top. Two knobs are on either side
of the rim in mid part of the cutaway spout. Twisted loop
handle. Body ornamented with plastic lines; two continuous lines cross over upper and lower register and join at back,
below handle base, and on front a grill-like motif of four
vertical short lines or bars. Two knobs, one on either side
of mid body. (B. M., inv. 132404)
3- Very fine fabric, fired hard. Slipped and highly burnished.
One side is in light brown, the other in black. In contrast to refined technical details ornamentation is rather crude in
the form of horizontal and vertical grooved lines on neck and
oblong body. Front spout below neck, the cutaway pouring
spout and small loop handle are missing. One of tripod feet
restored. Damaged mid body and three holes on belly.
(B. P2., inv. 132406)
4- Medium fabric, fired hard. Burnished surface (slipped? ) in
black and grey. Oxidised parts at slightly twisted handle and
cutaway spout. Carefully shaped, broad body resembling dumpy-
figure of a duck. Narrows to a delicate, pointed tail. Bet-
ween this projection and neck base parallel ribs in plastic. Spout broken and rim chipped. The back tripod feet restored. (B. M., inv. 132405)
5- Rather fine fabric. Probably slipped and burnished. Mostly
in dark grey colour. A large light brown patch on the back.
Rather large body on short tripod feet. Two on front are
partly broken, also the flat tail at the back. Cutaway spout
and loop handle broken in places. Two small knobs on spout below rim, one on either side. (Istanbul, inv. 3431)
173
6- Miniature vessel. Fine, dark grey fabric. Burnished. Form
of spout very similar to that of Shape VI juglets with slant- ing or oblique profile and narrow channel through neck. In-
cised decoration. Loop handle is missing. There is a small knob or "tail" at back. Short tripod feet. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 38)
7- Similar to above, no. 6. Spout is more like cutaway type. "Tail" at other end is flat and there is a knob underneath. Two more on the breast, one on either side of neck base.
Incised decoration of bands of dots (on either side of handle)
and zigzag line on mid body and front. Loop handle and two
of tripod feet missing. (Istanbul, inv. 3430)
Ber. no. 75 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 210 23.
8- Very-fine vessel. Dark grey, fine fabric coated with lustrous
red orange slip. Part of cutaway spout missing. Carinated
body with a flat "tail". Plastic ornamentation consists of two rectangles, one on either side of upper half of body, and filled in with parallel lines, also in plastic. There are two miniature "handles" on spout, one on either side and below
flanged rim. One small knob at neck base on front. Both
shape and technical details are unusual to Yortan pottery, and
museum registration does not specify it as a find from P.
Gaudin's excavations. (Istanbul, inv. 3432)
SHAPE XV Triple vessels (Fig. 74; Pl. XIII)
1- Quite fine, hard fired fabric, thin walls. Same colour surface
which may have been slipped, now worn out. Shape consists of
three jars with horizontal mouth joint on triangular plan
under a twisted loop handle. Three jars of unequal size orna-
mented in incision; the largest jar has a quadruple zigzag
band round body (or five chevrons) and a horizontal band on
174
neck; other two jars have hatched lozenges on body, three
on each jar. Incision is in thin, fine lines but rather shallow and careless. (8. M. ß inv. 132442)
2- Fine dark grey fabric with a soapy texture. Same surface colour, uniform all over. Rather a poor product with the jars
not fitting into the desired triple shape. Loop handle and rims are missing. The largest jar has a horn-like pointed knob and two vertically pierced lugs on upper body. Mouth
opening is'horizontal and large. Incised decoration consists
of a hatched band on shoulder, three rectangles on body, one with dotted interior and others latticed, and two strips of
perpendicular herring-bone motif. Smallest jar appears to
have mouth opening in the form of a narrow spout. One thick
stud on base brings the jar to the level of other two. Richly
incised with latticed rectangles, circles, and a hatched band
at spout base. Third jar has four lugs on body and one foot
on base. Incised motifs as above, also a wavy line and two
crescent-like incisions on lower body. Lumps of fabric which join jars one to another also decorated in incision, one wavy line on each lump, three altogether. (B. M., inv. 132443)
SHAPE XVI Rare vessels (Fig. 74j 75$ 76; Pl. XIII)
- Roughly shaped vessel. Black to light brown. Missing upper
parts, and handles/lugs. A large hole on one side, possibly
a sidespout. Uneven surface ornamented with white painted
lines that are faded. The shape could be a jar or jug.
(Louvre., inv. CA. 1220 88)
2- Extensively restored obscuring details of fabric. Surface in
dull dark grey colour, possibly smoothed but not burnished.
Slanting spout, flanged rim. In proportion the neck base is
much narrower than spout. Plastic ornamentation, three sets of quadruple bars and a pointed knob on neck base. Near rim
175
loop handle is vertically pierced. (St. Ger., inv. 58546)
3- Heavy black jug with a medium fabric and slipped and burnished
surface. Beak spout is quite horizontal and broad. Handle
rectangular in section. Twenty three flutings decorate the
body. (8.11., inv. 132407)
4- Very fine black/dark grey jug. Rather fine fabric and very thin walls. Slipped and burnished. Horizontal spout mostly missing. Short neck and everted rim. There are eight pointed knobs on upper body where body is broadest. In between knobs
are quadruple groups of parallel lines extending from neck base to base of body. (8. M., inv. 132409)
Ser. no. 26 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 80 9.
5- Fine black/grey fabric. Similar colour of surface, in places
lighter grey and buff. Possibly slipped. Double spout, and
single loop handle. Body and base are rounded. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 25)
6- Fine fabric with thin walls. Mostly in dark grey colour.
Badly broken. Small flattened base is on tripod feet. Tall,
cutaway spout is considerably everted forming broad pouring
channel. Unusual decoration consists of a zigzag band of three
chevrons. The motif is incised, the only Yortan jug of this
shape with this type of decoration. Inside each chevron and
at handle base are large holes enclosed'. by thin bubble-like
features. (St. Ger., inv. 58568)
7- Rather fine fabric. Very smooth, possibly slipped surface is in dark grey and light brown. Part of cutaway spout mis-
sing. Carinated body stands on prominent tripod feet. Two
flat lugs on either side of body and small pointed knobs above this protrusion suggest an anthromorphic shape, possibly a double hedgehog. (Sevres inv. 10729 15)
176
7- Dark grey/black, paste (body shard)
The matrix is conspicuously micaceous containing very
fine, dense spicules of muscovite with smaller quantities
of biotite.
Quartz 0.05-0.02 mm rounded and sub-
rounded; scattered
Cryptocrystalline calcite 0.05-0.2 mm; scattered
Volcanic glass 0.2 mm; brown, rare
Iron oxide particles 0.1 mm; occasional
177
CLASS 8 POTTERY ̀ (Fig. 77j 780 79)
All twenty one vessels under this classification are hand-made,
without the use of the fast wheel.
1- Miniature bowl, or a lid. Rather fine fabric. Surface is
burnished and brownish. Interior is a little grey. Triple
lugs on either side on rim. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 30)
2- Miniature bowl, or dish. Fine fabric, light grey surface
colour. Raised base. On one side near rim are a pair of
holes. (8. N., inv. 132412)
3- Rather coarse jar that breaks easily. Probably slipped, sur-
face colour mostly in dark grey. Everted rim, carinated body,
and flattened base. On one side trace of a lug or side-spout.
-(Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 82)
Ber. no. 56 See W. Orthmann, 1966) Ist. Mitt. 16: 16s 1?.
4- Small jar. Surface colour varies between black and reddish
brown. Roughly made. Possibly slipped. (B. M., inv. 132377)
5- Roughly made miniature jar. Surface colour grey to dirty light
brown. Two vertically pierced lugs. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 43)
6- Small jar in light grey colour. Smoothed surface. Everted
rim pierced in two places. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 61)
7- Coarse, grey fabric. Surface coated with thin slip of same
colour. Lug and side-spout missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 62)
8- Coarse, gray fabric.. Same colour surface smoothed. Most of
neck., -and all of loop handle are missing. Also where there
is a lid there must have been a single spout. Flat, raised
base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 78)
178
9- Rather fine fabric in dirty brown colour. Slipped and bur-
nished surface is in black. Horizontal mouth chipped. Two
sets of double lugs, one set on either side of body. Lugs
are vertically pierced. Rather thick walls, large globular body sits on flattened base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 69)
10 - Light grey and brown fabric. Surface coated . with red brown
slip, mostly worn out. Vertically pierced lugs are missing. Below flanged rim-neck is pierced in three places. Raised,
flat base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 47)
11 - Very fine red orange fabric. Surface in same colour slip
coating but mostly worn out. Flanged rim pierced in two
places. Two pointed and vertically pierced lugs on mid
body. Flattened base. (St. Ger., inv. 58571)
12 - Red fabric, covered with thin wash of light brown and reddish
colour. Five small knobs on body, a sixth is below handle
base. Small tripod feet. Rather roughly made vessel. Part
of obliquely cut spout is missing. Loop handle slightly
twisted. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 67)
13 - Rather fine fabric, fired hard. Mostly in light grey without
burnishing. Thick, round loop handle. Spout missing. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 66)
14 - Medium fabric, fired hard and light brown in colour. Smoothed
surface of similar colour, grey in places. Possibly had a
thin slip. Rather thickly made, heavy jug. Three prominent
knobs on body and one on handle. Flattened base, set off
centre. (St. Ger., inv.
15 - Rather fine fabric, fired hard. Uniform dull grey colour.
Probably only smoothed. obliquely cut spout, small twisted*
loop handle. (louvre, inv. CA. 1220 49)
179
16 - Uncleaned surface obscures details. Overall colour seems to
be in a tone of red but with dark grey patches. Probably
slipped. Obliquely cut spout, grooved loop handle.
(5t. Ger., inv. 58557)
17 - Uncleaned surface. Rather fine, hard fired fabric in coffee
brown. Surface colour appears to be mostly in dark grey,
possibly slipped. Rather thick jug, twisted loop handle
partly worn out. There are three knobs round mid body. At
the point where handle joins spout are two pointed knobs,
one on either side. Spout is cutaway type with the upper
part pressed-from sides into a bifoil-like form.
(St. Ger., inv. 58551)
18 - Very fine fabric in light red/orange colour. Surface slipped
and burnished in red brown. Thin, round basket handle. Side
spout is missing. (Istanbul, inv. 3466)
19 - Fine, light grey fabric. Smooth surface shows traces of a
red brown slip. Rather thick "teapot". Thick, round basket
handle,, and side spout. Rim lip is flat and slants inward.
Flattened base. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 5)
20 - Very fine, red orange fabric, slipped and burnished in similar
colour. Very thin Walls, shaping is slightly asymmetrical.
Tip of side spout chipped. Also round basket handle is broken
in the middle. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 51)
180
CLASS C POTTERY (Fig. 79-83; Pl. XIV; XV; XXI, no. 8,11)
1- Fine, hard fired fabric in red orange colour. Surface-covered
with same colour thin slip. Rather thin walls, thick round handles. Flat, possibly string-cut base. Wheel-made.
(Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 52)
2- Very fine Slight grey fabric., fired hard. Surface probably
slipped with same colour, and uniform all over. Ring base
slightly sunken in the middle. On body are two pointed lugs
with vertically pierced large holes. Everted rim also pierced
in two places. Tall neck decorated with shallow grooves.
Wheel-made. (Sevres inv. 10729 14)
3- Surface covered with lime encrustation obscuring details.
Rather fine fabric, fired hard and in light red colour. Prob-
ably-surface has slip coating of similar colour. Rather squat
body on rounded base. Most of horizontal mouth missing. Also
one of loop handles lost. Wheel-made. (St. Ger., inv. 58569)
4- Medium fabric. Surface colour in light grey. Spout bifoil
or trefoil in shape, chipped in places. Carinated body, small
flat base. Hand-made. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 79)
5- Very fine jug where fabric fired to a metallic hardness in
very thin walls. Unburnished surface in dull light gray colour.
Possibly slipped. Ring base, round loop handle. Horizontal,
bifoil spout. Grooved lines on neck and lower body. Wheel-
made. Its provenance as Yortan is not certain. (St. Car.,
inv. 46390)
6- Very fine, grey fabric and surface. But shaping is poor with
the flattened base lying quite off centre. Bumpy surface.
Horizontal spout is cut out above handle. Possibly Wheel-made.
(Sevres inv. 10729 12)
181
7- Fine, light grey fabric, fired hard. Without burnishing,
but may have had a thin slip coating in light red brown
colour. Roughly shaped. Slightly beak-like spout, partly
chipped. The mouth opening is in leaf shape. Grooved and impressed lines and dots. Hand-made. (Louvre, inv.
CA. 1220 3)
8- Fine fabric. Surface is coated in a thin red orange slip,
mostly worn out. Lower parts of body have black patches. Rather roughly shaped. Bumpy surface, round body sits crooked
on flattened base. A very tall and narrow beak spout. Hand-
made, (B. M., inv. 132.14
9- Very fine, hard fired fabric in light red colour. Surface
coated with a thin red slip. It is a faultless product,
shaped to perfection. A tall, round neck has cutaway spout
with everted rim. Loop handle is round. It is by far the
finest product of the'site. Possibly wheel-made. (B. M..,
inv. 132410)
10 - Very fine fabric, fired hard and light orange red in colour.
Similar to above jug, no. 9. Red brown slip coating. Missing
spout and loop handle can be restored according to no. 9 jug.
Probably hand-made. (Sevre, inv. 10729 10).
11 - Fine, hard fired fabric in orange/red colour. Surface slipped
in same colour. Broad, flattened base, round handle. Tall
beak spout missing. "Hand-made. Its provenance as Yortan is
not certain. -(Paris Inst., inv. )
Red paste The matrix is birefringent from orange to red and is very
micaceous. The mica appears to be muscovite and the
crystals are less well-defined than in no. 2 5,159 . Quartz 0.1-0.3 mm sub-angular; scattered
Polycrystalline quartz 0.4 mm; occasional
Muscovite 0.2 mm; scattered
Biotite 0.2 mm; scattered
182
12 - Coarse fabric in red brown colour. There is a grey core.
Surface coated with thin dirty brown colour slip. Large
body, three small knobs on the middle part. Round handle.
Spout is missing, but could be restored to the tall beak form
as aboves no. B. 11. Hand-made. (Paris Inst., no. 3)
13 - Rather fine., light brown, reddish in colour, and tired hard.
Surface in red brown slip, now mostly washed off. Very tall
neck and beak spout, slightly everted rim. Round loop handle.
Flat base. Hand-made. (Louvre, inv. 'CA. 1220 54)
14 - Very fine, hard fired fabric in light grey colour. Some sur-
face colour in slip coating. Tall neck and cutaway spout
with flanged rim. Twisted loop handle. Body is lentoid in
shape, possibly made in two parts and joined as indicated by
line below handle base. Hand-made. (B. M.., inv. 1 32! {11)
Ber. no. 36'' See W. Orthmannp 1966p Ist. ýt. Mtt. 16: 11p 12.
15 - Very coarse fabric, and thick walls. There is a reddish centre
marked by thin layer of grey on either side. Slipped surface.
Base of neck marked by a ridge. Form of spout is uncertain.
Hand-made. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 100)
Ber. no. 27 See W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist, Mitt. 16: 8s 9.
16 - Coarse fabric in a mixture of grey and dirty brown colour.
Surface only roughly smoothed. Tall neck, tip of spout is
missing. Handle and neck marked by deeps coarse grooving.
There is a pair of knobs on front body. Hand-made. One gets
the impression that this is an unfinished product. (Louvre,
inv. CA. 1220 1)
17 - Very fine fabric. Dark grey surface colour with some oxidised
patches in red. Smoothed surface that may have once had slip
coating. Rather thin walls, everted rim, carinated body, and
183
flat base. Handle is very broad, and flat in section. Marks
of a fine comb-like tool on surface. Wheel-made. (8. M. ß inv. 132494)
18 - Fine., hard fired fabric. Surface is marked by impression
of straw that may have been in the fabric. Light gray and light brown colour. Surface now covered with some shiny substance, is. wax, or varnish. Shape is a pair of human feet with toes and ankles indicated. Probably belongs to
a vessel with close upper part. This is indicated by the inner surface of the piece which is left untreated either by
smoothing or slip coating. Hand-made. (B. M. p inv. 132447; inv. 132448)
YORTAN FIGURINES (Pl. XVI)
Both are made of white marble. Smaller piece has incised
feature on other side. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1220 1s 2)
YORTAN SPINDLE WHORLS (Fig. 840 850 86; P1. III, no. 8)
1-36 All are made of very fine fabric and sometimes burnished.
Surface colour varies between tone of grey and light or red- dish brown. Shapes are variations in bifoil and truncated
bifoil. Several, no. 31-36p are flat or cylindrical. When
ornamented it is in incision, sometimes white filled. All
finds belong to B. M. collection, inv. 1321}. 5 2. -4.0
YORTAN METAL FINDS (P1. XVI)
See K. Bittel, 1939, A. f 0.13: 21.
184
POTTERY FROM 6ABAKOY (Fig. B7)
For no. 1., 4j, 5. p11., see K. Bittel,, 1939, A. _f
0.13.
For the rest, see W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt. 16: 1 rf.
POTTERY FROM SOMA (Fig. 88)
See W. Orthmann, op. cit.
Small terracotta object of uncertain provenance, see H. Th.
Bossert, 1960, O. 29: Tab. LXXXVI
POTTERY FROM PERGAMON (Fig. 88)
See A Conze (1912) Altertümer von Pergamon I, 2. Berlin,
p. 157, Fig. 100 11; p. 158, Fig. 12.
185
POTTERY OF UNCERTAIN PROVENANCE (Fig. 90-97; P1. XVII-XIX;
P1. XXI, no. 27)
1- Black burnished. Incised and white filled ornamentation. Hand-made. Private Collection.
2- Fine black burnished. Two horizontally pierced lugs. Incised
decoration. Hand-made. Private collection.
3- Grey/black ware. Ledge handles. Hand-made. Private collec-
tion.
=. 4 - Grey burnished. Grooved decoration. Hand-made. Private
collection.
5- Black burnished. Four sets of double knobs on rim. Hand-
made. Private collection.
6- Grey/black ware. Four sets of double knobs on rim. Hand-
made. Private collection.
7- Fine,, black burnished. Incised decoration. Hand-made.
Private collection.
e- Very fine black burnished. Incised decoration. Hand-made.
Private collection.
9- Lid and pyxis in grey ware. Possibly slipped and burnished.
Four holes below rim; corresponding four holes on lid.
Incised decoration is crude, more like scratching the surface
with a fine point. Hand-made. (8. M. ß inv. 132898)
10 - Very fine black burnished. Incised and white filled deco-
ration. Hand-made. Private collection.
11 - Fine black burnished. Incised and white filled decoration.
186
Hand-made. Private collection.
12 - Fine black burnished. Incised and white filled decoration,
Hand-made. Private collection.
13 - Black/grey burnished. Incised and white filled decoration.
Hand-made. Private collection.
14 - Fine black burnished. Incised and white filled decoration.
Hand-made. Private collection.
15 - Lustrous black burnished juglet. Cutaway type spout, knob
at handle base. Incised decoration of triple zigzag band
and swastika. White filled incision. Hand-made. (B. M.,
inv. 135478)
16 - Burnished black jug. White painted chevrons mostly faded.
Round base, obliquely cut spout.
17 - Fine burnished surface. Mottled in light brown, buff and
light red. Incised decoration. Inside traces of red sub-
stance. Hand-made. Private collection.
18 - Fine fabric. Surface colour is dull dirty brown and light
grey. Thin walls, but asymmetric shape. One of four loop
handles missing. Knobs in between handles. Hand-made.
(Brussels, inv. P. G. 51.1.13)
19 - Grey/black jar on tall tripod feat. Hand-made. Private
collection.
20 - Jet black, and white filled incised decoration. Two pierced
lugs and four feet. Hand-made. Private collection.
21 - Grey/black jar. Incised decoration. Hand-made. Private
collection.
187
22 - Grey/black jar. Missing basket handle. Incised decoration.
Hand-made. Private collection.
23 - Black/dark grey burnished surface with a reddish brown under- tone. Broken spout. Small but well centred flattened base.
Three sets of triple chevrons on body. Hand-made. (Brussels,
inv. P. G. 51.1.10)
24 - Grey/black burnished jug. Hand-made. Private collection.
25 - Coarse jug with a dull surface colour of black to grey and
red brown. Broken spout. Three knobs on body had originally
been inside three sets of triple painted chevrons, now almost
completely washed out. Roughly twisted handle. Hand-made.
(Brussels, inv. P. G. 51.1.7)
26 - Well shaped, fine jug. Very smooth surface is in dull grey
and red colour. Not burnished. Rather rigid outline. Rim
top is flat near handle. Hand-made. (Brussels, inv. A. 2389)
27 - Dark grey, medium fabric. Surface colour in reddish orange
mixing, with light grey. Slipped but not burnished. Three
flat knobs and three sets of triple chevrons which in places
are in a grey colour darker than the surface of pot. Obliquely
cut spout is missing. Hand-made. (Brussels, inv. P. G. 51.1.22)
28 - Very thickly made jug. Dull surface colour is dark grey with
some reddish patches. Tip of spout missing. Probably quite
tall. and beak-like. But it could also be cutaway type. Three
knobs and three sets of triple chevrons on body. White painted
chevrons are largely faded. Small plastic 'pendant' motif at
neck base. Hand-made. (Brussels, inv. P. G. 51.1.1)
29 - Uniform black surface. Dull colour without burnishing. Three
tall-feet, shape of missing spout could be cutaway or slanting.
Three sets of triple, white painted chevrons on body.
188
Hand-made. (Brussels, inv. P. G. 51.1.19)
30 - Burnished surface. Overall colour is reddish brown with little black or dark grey areas. Top of cutaway spout worn out. Rather globular body with slightly rounded base. Two knobs on-spouts one on either side and below everted rim. Four sets chevrons; each composed of five parallel, lines in
matt white painting. Pointed knobs in each chevron. Hand-
made. - (B. 11. ß inv. 132497)
31 - Coarse., black ware. Hand-made. Private collection.
32 - Very fine, jet lustrous surface. Ornamentation incised and
white filled. Hand-made(? ). Private collection.
33 - Fine fabric. Dark grey surface, possibly slipped and bur-
nished. Largely restored. Main jar consists of a tall
cylindrical neck, flanged rim, and a large round body. Round
base. On upper body are four small hole-mouth jars and four
small loop handles in between jars. Each jar is pierced below
rim in two points. Incised decoration. Hand-made. (Cambridge,
inv. G. R. 2.1947. From Babaköy(? ). Given by 3. R. Stewart)
34 - Triple vessel with a fourth small jar on one side. Fine
fabric, possibly coated in thin slip of dark grey colour.
All three have horizontal mouth and everted rim. Rim of
small, fourth jar is missing. Rather worn out surface. White
filled incised decoration. Hand-made. (Institute of Archaeo-
logy, London)
35 - Triple vessel of similar surface as above, no. 34, but without
the additional fourth, small jar. Uncleaned surface ob-
scures details. Dark grey black fabric. Rim and neck parts
and loop handle missing. Incised decoration of wavy bands
and concentric circles. Hand-made. (Louvre, inv. CA. 1361 1)
189
36 - Very fine jug. Black burnished with little brown patches. Tall elegant neck with a pointed, leaf shape spout. Everted
rim, with a flat top. Neck grooved in the middle. Double twisted handle. Pear shaped, carinated body with flat base,
and on tall., cornered tripod feet. A small loop handle on mid body at front, and two horn-like projections on either side
of body. Hand-made. (Brussels, inv. 0.3434, Burdur region(? ))
37 - Dark grey ware. Incised decoration on body and on four feet.
Private collection, (See also W. Orthmann, 1966, Ist. Mitt.
16: 15., 17)
38 - Lustrous black jug. Slipped and burnished. Tall cutaway
spout, flat, strap handle. Upper part of carinated body
covered with flutings. (Brussels, inv. 0.3601)
190
ABBREVIATIONS
AAA Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology: Liverpool, Acts Arch. Acta Archaeological Kgdbenhavn.
A. f 0. Archiv für Orientforschung.
AJA American Journal of Archaeology. An. St. Anatolian Studies. Arch. Archaeology
ASAA Annuario dells {Regis} Scuola archeologica di Atone
e delle missioni italiane in Orients.
Ath. itt. Mitteilungen das Deutschen Archaalogischen Instituts,
Athenische Abteilung.
8* d A. Bolletino d'arte.
all, 8elleten1Türk Tarih Kurumu.
Beycesultan S. Lloyd and D. Mellaarts Beycesultan I, Londons
1962.
BSA Annual of the British School of Athens.
CAH The Cambridge Ancient History.
CRAT Comptes rendus des Seances do I'Academie des inscrip-
tions et belles-lettres.
CUA Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum.
FS Fundberichte aus Schwaben.
Nos . Hesperia.
HSCP Harvard Studies in Classical Philology.
. ILN Illustrated London News.
Ist tt. Istanbular Mitteilungen.
Or Orientalia.
SAPS Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.
RAICP Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain
and Ireland, Occasional Papers.
St. M. A. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology.
Sty al. Studie Balcanica.
Thermi I-IV W. Lambs Excavations at Thermi_on Lesbos. Cambridges
1936.
191
Troy I., II °- C. W. Blegen, 3. L. Caskey, M. Rawson, J. Sperling,
Troy I. The First and Second Settlements,
Princeton, 1950. Troy III, IV C. W. Blegen, at al.., Troy II. The Third. Fourth
and Fifth Settlements, Princeton, 1951.
TTAED Türk Tarih, Arkeologya ve Etnografya Dergisi.
192
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Akurgal, E.
Akurgal,, E.
Alklm, q U. 8.
Alp., S.
Alps S.
Alps S.
Alps S.
Angel, J. L.
Arik., R. 0.
Bernabo-Brea� L.
Bernabo*-Brea., L.
Bittel, K. and Otto,, H.
Bittel, K.
8ittel, K.
Blegens C. Wes
Caskeyp J. Los
RaWsonp M. and
Sperling, J. S.
1950 Bayrakli Kazis.. Ön Rapor. Ankara.
1958 Yortankultur - Siedlung in Ovabayindir
bei Balikesir. Anatolia 3: 156 ff.
1978 Excavations at Ikiztepe. Ans St. 28:
23 ff.
1964- Karahüyük Kazisi. Haberler. Bell. 28:
562.
1965 Karahüyük Kazisi. Haberler. Bell. 29: '
550.
1966 Karahüyük Kazisi. Haberler.
493.
Be11.30s
1967 Karahüyük Kazisi. Haberler. Bell. 31:
456.
1976 Early Bronze Age Karatal People and their
Cemeteries. AJA 8: 373 ff.
1939 Karaoglan Höyügü. Bell. 3: 27 ff.
1964 Poliochni I. Citta Preistorica nall'isola
di Lemnos. Rome.
1976 Poliochni IT. Citta Preistorica
nell'isola di Lemnos. Rome.
1939 Demirci Hüyük. Berlin.
1939 Ein Gräbefeld der Yortankultur bei
9abaköy.. A. f 0.13: 1 ff.
1955 Einige Kleinfunde aus Mysien und aus
Kilikien. Ist. 6: 113 ff.
1950 Troy I. The First and Second Settlements.
Princeton.
193
Blegen, C. We. * Caskey, J. L..,
Rawson, M. and Sperling, J. S.
Boehringer, E. and Kraus., F.
Bosanquet, R. C.
Bossert., H. The
Bosserts H. Th.
Branigan, K.
Caskey, J. L.
Caskey, J. L.
Coleman, J. E.
Coleman, J. E.
Coleman, J. E.
Collignon, M.
Conze, A.
Cooks, J. M.
Demangel, R.
1951 Troy II. The Third. Fourth and Fifth
Settlements. Princeton.
1937 Altertümer von Pergamon. IX. Berlin
and Leipzig. 100.
1896 Notes from the Cyclades. BSA 3: 57 ff.
-97 1942 Altanatolien. Berlin.
1960 Reisebericht aus Anatolian. III. Or. 29:
317 ff.
1970 The Foundations of Palatial Crete.
London.
. 1960 The Early Helladic Period in the Argolid.
Hesp. 29: 285 ff.
1971 Greece, Crete., and the-Aegean Islands in
the Early Bronze Age. CAH I. part 2:
Chapter XXVIa. Cambridge.
1974 The Chronology and Interconnections of
the Cycladic Islands in the Neolithic
and Early Bronze Age. AJA 78: 333 ff.
1977 Keos. I. Kephala. Princeton.
1977 Early Cycladic Clay Vessels. In J. Thimme
(ed. ) Art and Culture of the Cyclades.
Chicago. 109 ff.
1901 Note sur les Fouilles de M. Paul Gaudin
Bans la-Necropole de Yortan, an Mysie.
'CRAI: 810 ff.
1912 Altetümer von Pergamon. I. 2. Berlin.
157,158.
1973 Bronze Age sites in the Troad. In
R. A. Crossland and A. Birchall (ed. )
Bronze-Age Migration in the Aegean.
London. 37 ff.
1926 Le Tumulus dit de Prot5silas. Paris.
194
Dietz., S. 1974
Doumas, C. 1977
Doumas, C. 1977
Driehause, J. 1957
Eastoni 0. F.
Emrei K.
Esin.. U.
Prahistorische Siedlungsfunde in der
unteren Kaikosebene und an dem Golfe von
candarli. Ist. Mitt. 7: 76 ff.
1976 Towards a Chronology for the Anatolian
Early Bronze Age. An. St. 26: 145 ff.
1978 Yanarlar. A Hittite Cemetery near Afyon.
Ankara.
1969 Kuantitif Analiz Yardimiyla Anatolu'da
Baslangicindan Asur Kolonileri vagina
Kadar Bakir ve Tunc Madenciligi.
Istanbul.
Evans., 3. D. 1964 Excavations in the Neolithic Settlement
of Knossos, 1957-60. Part I. BSA 59:
132 ff.
Evans, 3. D. 1965 Knossos and the Neolithic of Crete. Atti
del VI Conaresso Internazionale dells
Scienze Preistoriche at Protostoriche.
Sezione III. Roma 1962. Florence. 220 ff.
Evans, 3. D. and 1968 Excavations at Saliagos. Oxford.
Renfrew, C.
Forsdyke, E. 1925 Prehistoric Aegean Pottery. Cata lonue
of the Greek and Etruscan vases in the
British Museum. I0 part 1. London.
French, D. 1961 Late Chalcolithic Pottery in northwest
Turkey and the Aegean. An_St. 11: 99 ff.
French, 0.1967 Prehistoric Sites in northwest Anatolia.
I. The Iznik Area. An. St. 17: 49 ff.
French., D. 1968 Anatolia and the Aegean in the Third
Millenium BC. Cambridge. PhD Thesis.
Two Painted Duck Vases from Rhodes,
Act. Arch, 45: 133 ff.
Early Bronze Age Habits in the Cyclades.
St. M. A. 58.
Early Cycladic Burials. In 3. Thimme (ed. ) Art and Culture of the Cyclades.
195
French, D. 1969 Prehistoric Sites in northwest Anatolia.
II. The Balikesir and Akhisar/1anisa
Areas. An. St. 19: 41 ff.
Furness, A. 1956 Some Early Pottery of Samos, Kalimnos,
and Chios. PPS 22: 173 ff.
Garstang, J. 1937 Explorations in Cilicia: The Neilson
Garstang, J. 1953
Georgiev., G. Iss -1979
Merpert, N. J.
and Dimitrov, G. 0.
Getz-Preziosi, P. 1977
Expedition. Preliminary Report. II.
AAA 25: 12 ff,
Prehistoric Mersin. Oxford.
Ezero. Eine Siedlung aus der Frühbronze-
zeit. Sofia.
Early Cycladic Stone Vases. In J. Thimme
(ed. ) Art and Culture of the Cyclades.
Chicago. 95 ff.
Goldman., H. 1956 Excavations-at Gözlü Kula. Tarsus. II.
Princeton.
Götze, A. 1957 Kulturgeschichte Kleinasiens. Munich.
Haspels, C. H. E. 1971 The Highlands of Phrygia. I. Princeton.
Höckmann, 0.1977 The Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Idols
of Anatolia. In J. Thimme (ed. ) Art and
Culture of the Cyclades. Chicago. 173 ff.
Hood,, S. 1965 Excavations at Emporio, Chios, 1952-55.
Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale delle
Scienze Preistoriche a Protostoriche.
Sezione III. Roma 1962. Florence. 224 ff.
Hutchinson, R. W. 1935 Uruk and Yortan. Ira 2: 211 ff.
Ingen, W. van, 1933 Prehistoric Pottery of Mysia. CVA Univer-
sity of Michigan, fasc. 1p USA fasc. 3.
14.
Kadish., B. 1969 Excavations of Prehistoric Remains at
Aphrodisias., 1967. AJA 73: 49 ff.
Kadish, 8,1971 Excavations of Prehistoric Remains at
Aphrodisias, 1968,1969. AJA 75: 121 ff.
Koerte., A. 1899 Ein altphrygischer Tumulus bei Bos-öjük,
Lamunia. Ath. Mitt. 24: 1 ff.
196
Kökten.. I. K.
Korfmann., M.
Korfmann, M.
Kopay, H. Z.
Koqays H. Z.
Kopy, H. Z. and Akoks M.
Kühne, H.
Lamb, W.
Lamb., W.
Lembo W.
Lamb., , W.
Levi, D.
Levi, D.
Lloyd., S. and
Gökqe, N.
Lloydy S. and Mellaart, J.
Loeschke, S.
Massoül, M.
Mayence., F. and Verhaagen, V.
Mellaart, J.
1949 1949 Yili Tarih öncesi Aralatirmalars
Hakkinda Kiss Rapor. Bell. 13: 811 ff.
1978 Demirci Huyu'k, 1977. An. St. 28: 16 ft.
1979 Demirci Hüyuk. Eine vorgeschichtliche Festung an der phrygisch-bithynischen Grenze. Ist. Mitt. 29: 9 ff.
1934 Ahlatlibel Hafriyati. TTAED 2. 1951 Alaca Hüyük Kazlsi. 1937-39. Ankara.
1950 Amasya Mahmatlar Köyü Definesi. Bell.
14: 481 ff.
1976 Die Keramik vom Tell Chuera. Berlin.
1936 Some West Anatolian vases at Cambridge.
-37 BSA 37: 166 ff.
1936 Excavations at Thermi on Lesbos. Camb-
ridge. 1936 Excavations at Kusura near Afyon Kars-
hisar. Archaeologia 86: 1 ff.
1937 Excavations at Kusura near Afyon Kara-
hisar II. Archaeologia 87:. 217 ff.
1961 Le due campagne di scavo a Issas, ASAA
-62 23-24: 555 ff.
1965 Le campagne 1962-1964 a Iasos. ASAA
-66 27-28: 505 ff.
1951 Excavations at Polatli. A new investi-
gation of Second and Third Millenium
stratigraphy in Anatolia. An. St. 1: 21 ff.
1962 Beycesultan I. The Chalcolithic and Early
Bronze Ana Levels. London.
1912 Die Arbeiten zu Pergamon. Ath, MMitt. 37: 404.
1934 Style de la Mysie (Yortan). CVA Sevres
fasce unique, France, fast. 13.11 ff.
Mysie (Yortan). CVA Belgique, fasc. III.
1954 Pre-classical Remains in Southern Turkey.
An. St. 4: 175 If.
197
Mellaart, J.
Mellaart, J.
Mellaart,, J.
Mellaart., J.
Mellaart., J.
Mellaart., J. _
Mellaart, J.
Mellink, M. J.
Mellink., M. J.
Mellink, M. J.
Mellink, M. J.
Mellink, M. J.
Mellink, M. JJ.
Mellink, M. J.
Mellink, M. J.
Mellink, M. J.
1955 Some Prehistoric Sites in Northwestern
Anatolia. Ist. Mitt. 6: 53 ff.
1959 The Royal Treasure of"Oorak. ILN Nov.
28: 754 ff.
1966 The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Ages
in the Near East and Anatolia. Beyruth.
1967 ýatal Hüyük. A Neolithic Town in
Anatolia. London.
1971 - Anatolia c. 4000-2300 BC. CAH I., part 2:
Chapter XVIII. Cambridge. 371 ff.
1971 Prehistory of Anatolia and its Relations
with the Balkans. St. Bal. 5: 119 ff.
1977 Troy, a re-assessment. Transactions of the IV International Colloquium on Aegean
Prehistory, Sheffield.
1956 A Hittite Cemetery at Cordion. Phila-
delphia.
1965 Anatolian Chronology. In R. W. Ehrich
(ed. ) Chronologies in Old World Archaeo-
logy. Chicago.
1964 Excavations at Karatap-Semayüklin Lycia.
AJA 68: 269 ff; 304 ff.
1965 Excavations at Karata? -Semayük in Lycia.
AJA 69: 241 ff.
1966 Excavations at Karata? -Semayük in Lycia.
AJA 70: 245 ff.
1967 Excavations at Karata? a-Semayük in, Lycia.
AJA 71: 251 ff.
1968 Excavations at Karatas-Semayük in Lycia.
AJA 72: 243 ff.
1969 Excavations at Karata? -Semayük in�Lycia.
AJA 73: 319 ff.
1970 Excavations at Karataj-$emayük in Lycia.
AJA 74: 245 ff.
198
Merrillees, R. S.
Mikov., V.
milojcic. p V.
Mitten, D. G.
Mitten., 0. G. and Yügrüm, G.
, Mitten, 0. G. and
Yürüm. G.
Morricone, L.
Myres., J. L.
Ormerod, H. A.
Orthmann., W.
Orthmann, W.
0zgüF., T.
Özgüq.. T.
Pottier, E.
Renfrew., C.
Renfrew,, C.
1979 Cyprus, the Cyclades, and Crate in the
Early to Middle Bronze Ages. Acts of
the International Archaeological Sympo-
sium. - Nicosia.
1959 The Prehistoric Mound of Karanovo.
Arch. 12j no. 2: 88 ff. 1961 Samos. I. Bonn.
1968 Prehistoric Survey of Gygean Lake and Excavations at Ahlatli Tepecik. BASAR
191: 6 ff.
1971 The Gygean Lake, 1969; Eski Balikhare.
HSCP 75.
1974 Ahlatli Tepecik. Arch. 272 no. 1: 22 ft.
1950 Scavi e ricerche a Coo, 1935-1943.
B. d A. 35: 324 ff.
1903 The Early Pot-fabrics of Asia Minor.
RAIOP 33: 367 ff.
1911 Prehistoric Remains in Southwestern Asia
-12 Minor. GSA 18: 80 ff.
1963 Die Keramik der Frühen Bronzezeit aus
Inneranatolien. Berlin.
1966 Keramik der Yortankultur in den Berliner
Museen. . 1st, itt. 16: 1 ff.
1944 Yortan Mezarli. k Külturune Ait Yeni
Buluntular. Bell. 8: 53 ff.
1948 Die Bestattunpsbraeuche im vorgeschicht-
lichen Anatolien. Ankara.
Style de Is Mysie (Yortan). EVA Louvre
4p France, no. 5.
1972 The Emergence of Civilisation. The
Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third
Millenium BC. London.
1973 Before Civilisation. The Radiocarbon
Revolution and Prehistoric Europe.
London.
199
Renfrew, C. 1977 The Cycladic Culture. In 3., Thimme (ed. )
Art and Culture of the C_ycl ades.
Chicago. 17 ff. Schiek, S. and 1965 Einige frühbronzezeitliche Funds aus
Fischer, F. Kleinasien. FS 17: 156 ff.
Schliemann, H. 1875 Troy and its Remains. London. 'Schliemann, H. 1880 Ilios: The City and Country of the
Trojans. London. Spanos, P. Z. 1976 Untersuchung Ober den bei Homer "depas
amphikypellan" genannten Gefässtypus.
Ist. Mitt. Beiheft 6.
Sperling, 3. S. 1976 Kumtepe in the Troad. Trial Excava-
tions. Hesp. 45, no. 4: 305 ff.
Stewart, 3. R. 1948 Handbook to Nicholson Museumm. Uniyer-
sity of Sydney. 74 ff.
Stronach, D. B. 1957 The Development and Diffusion of Metal
Types in Early Bronze Age Anatolia.
An. St. 7: 89 ff.
Vermeuls, E. 1964 The Early Bronze Age in Caria. Arch,
17, no. 4: 244 ff. Weinberg, S. S. 1965 The Relative Chronology of the Aegean
in the Stone and Early Bronze Ages. In
R. W. Ehrich (ed. ) Chronologies in Old
World Archaeology. Chicago. 285 ff.
Warren, P. 1969 An Early Bronze Age Potter's Workshop in
Crete. Antiquity 43: 224 ff.
Warren, P. 1972 Myrtos_ An Early Bronze Age Settlement
in Crete. Oxford.
Warren, P. 1973 Crete, 3000-1400 BC; immigrations and
the archaeological evidence. In R. A.
Crossland and A. Birchall (ad. ) Bronz`
Age Migrations in the Aegean. London.
41 ff,
wheeler, T. S. 1974 Early Bronze Age Burial Customs in
Western Anatolia. SA 76: 415 ff.
200
Xanthanidides., S. 1905 Cretan Kernoi. BSA 12: 9 ff.
-06 Yakar, J. 1976 Northern Anatolia in the Early Bronze
Age. Tel Aviv 2: 133 ff. Yakar, 3.1979 Troy and Anatolian Early Bronze Age
Chronology. An. St. 29: 51 ff.